Wasteland The Wasteland 2 Beta Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Infinitron]

I assume that PoE is being designed with the idea that the player wants to control 6 characters and there is not reason to impose any cost on party size because it would decrease fun for no reason.

"Impose cost", no. Grant some advantage to smaller parties, maybe yes.

Otherwise, why even give you the option to have one? It seems contrary to his design philosophy.

 

[tuluse]

"Impose cost", no. Grant some advantage to smaller parties, maybe yes.

Otherwise, why even give you the option to have one?

Player imposed difficulty, or the player doesn't like controlling 6 characters. However, the game isn't being made for people in the latter group.

Edit: a lost advantage is still an imposed costs. Semantics won't change it.

 

[Infinitron]

Edit: a lost advantage is still an imposed costs. Semantics won't change it.

Well, these games already had the lost advantage of giving you less experience points per character and most people don't view that as an imposed cost.

And "player imposed difficulty" is a very non-Sawyery thing as you know

 

[tuluse]

Well, these games already had the lost advantage of giving you less experience points per character and most people don't view that as an imposed cost.

If you can still reach max level, it's not.

And "player imposed difficulty" is a very non-Sawyery thing as you know

I don't think so. He wrote on spring.me that making all characters valid meant that players couldn't make intentionally gimped ones for challenge, and considered that flaw. Just a very minor one.

 

[Infinitron]

If you can still reach max level, it's not.

They still don't view it as an imposed cost even if you can't.

Anyway, we'll see what the man has to say.

 

[Jedi Master Radek]

It would be nice if high charisma offered a way of avoiding random encounters with human enemies. It can be explained that charismatic people know how to look scary, in what way to hold a weapon. Average level charisma would scary off only much lower leveled than a player human encounters, very high the same level and maxed would strike a fear into hearts of stronger adversaries than the player.

 

[undecaf]

Since there's plenty of combat challenges to be had, perhaps charisma should encourage and strengthen more noncombat solutions and possibilities.
Say, give chance to get an XP bonus for passing Ass checks (the chance being based on the talkers charisma and the amount of bonus being based on party collective charisma -- not too hefty bonuses, but something to slightly incentivize for missing out on the looting the corpses).

Exceptionally high charisma could also have a chance of lowering the Smart and Kiss Ass checks a notch or two (Hard Ass doesn't need to apply as it doesn't sound a very charisma driven skill anyway).

Charisma could also help determine (once again, chance based) the initial hostility (perhaps time based -- "Who the fuck are you, run along now before you get hurt" says the closest enemy; linger on for too long and be attacked, leave quickly, or use this to your advantage and gain initiative on combat) of a random encounters that consist of human enemies.

 

[Decado]

Since there's plenty of combat challenges to be had, perhaps charisma should encourage and strengthen more noncombat solutions and possibilities.
Say, give chance to get an XP bonus for passing Ass checks (the chance being based on the talkers charisma and the amount of bonus being based on party collective charisma -- not too hefty bonuses, but something to slightly incentivize for missing out on the looting the corpses).

Exceptionally high charisma could also have a chance of lowering the Smart and Kiss Ass checks a notch or two (Hard Ass doesn't need to apply as it doesn't sound a very charisma driven skill anyway).

Charisma could also help determine (once again, chance based) the initial hostility (perhaps time based -- "Who the fuck are you, run along now before you get hurt" says the closest enemy; linger on for too long and be attacked, leave quickly, or use this to your advantage and gain initiative on combat) of a random encounters that consist of human enemies.

I like this post. Also, you have Al Swearengen in your signature, therefore you are a cool bro.

 

[Decado]

Regarding CHA affecting party size . . .

It would be hilarious to see some of the posters on the official forums lose their shit over this. YOU TOOK AWAY THE LIST INVENTORY, ADDED TARGETED SHOTS, AND NOW THIS????! I DON'T WANT ANOTHER FALLOUT!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Infinitron]

It would be nice if high charisma offered a way of avoiding random encounters with human enemies. It can be explained that charismatic people know how to look scary, in what way to hold a weapon. Average level charisma would scary off only much lower leveled than a player human encounters, very high the same level and maxed would strike a fear into hearts of stronger adversaries than the player.

Since there's plenty of combat challenges to be had, perhaps charisma should encourage and strengthen more noncombat solutions and possibilities.
Say, give chance to get an XP bonus for passing Ass checks (the chance being based on the talkers charisma and the amount of bonus being based on party collective charisma -- not too hefty bonuses, but something to slightly incentivize for missing out on the looting the corpses).

Exceptionally high charisma could also have a chance of lowering the Smart and Kiss Ass checks a notch or two (Hard Ass doesn't need to apply as it doesn't sound a very charisma driven skill anyway).

Charisma could also help determine (once again, chance based) the initial hostility (perhaps time based -- "Who the fuck are you, run along now before you get hurt" says the closest enemy; linger on for too long and be attacked, leave quickly, or use this to your advantage and gain initiative on combat) of a random encounters that consist of human enemies.

I'm pretty sure stuff like that (scripted uses of Charisma in dialogue, etc) is already in the game. I think what inXile are looking for is something more systemic.

 

[felipepepe]

Honestly, Wasteland 2 doesn't have the complexity required to have stuff like charisma impacting reactions or talking out of a random encounter. This is not Arcanum or Fallout, you won't finish the game as a pacifist and a combat encounter that you don't fight is just boring or overlapping with outdoorsman.

 

[Zed]

Honestly, Wasteland 2 doesn't have the complexity required to have stuff like charisma impacting reactions or talking out of a random encounter. This is not Arcanum or Fallout, you won't finish the game as a pacifist and a combat encounter that you don't fight is just boring or overlapping with outdoorsman.

do you think they should remove the kick/kiss-ass skills?

 

[tuluse]

Regarding CHA affecting party size . . .

It would be hilarious to see some of the posters on the official forums lose their shit over this. YOU TOOK AWAY THE LIST INVENTORY, ADDED TARGETED SHOTS, AND NOW THIS????! I DON'T WANT ANOTHER FALLOUT!!!!!!!!!!

Fallout 1 had no such effect from charisma. It was added in Fallout 2, and Troika used it in Arcanum.

 

[felipepepe]

do you think they should remove the kick/kiss-ass skills?

Not entirely.

I find retarded that there are 3 skills for the exact same thing, each arbitrarily working in one place or another (reminds of the worst part of Long Live the Queen). I also find pointless to use dialog skills on NPCs that are nothing but enemies, like you do on the radio tower. K', I persuaded him to let me pass, what now? FUCKING NOTHING, they serve no purpose. I simply use the smart-ass reply for some XP, and then kill them for fun and MORE XP, just like that thing VD was talking about...

However, I think it is good to have a "diplomacy" skill when dealing with the citizens of the wasteland, being able to persuade them. But again, having three fucking skills for the same thing is pointless. Especially since you're taking three completely different approaches and making them work the same boring way:

- The Hard-Ass (intimidate) approach should be achieved through force; you kill the guy's escort to intimidate him, or simply beat him into submission. Maybe use your kill count, like AoD does.
- Smart-Ass should be actually smart; players use their other skills like perception and computer hacking to find evidences needed to change the guy's mind, AND navigate the dialog well. I.e., the Master in Fallout 1.
- Kiss-Ass (persuasion) should be the only skill-based one, influenced by charisma, although still requiring cautious navigation of the dialog tree, not just clicking on the "I PERSUADE" icon.

The way it is now is lazy, they collapsed all that into 3 skills that are used by clicking on marked boxes during dialog.

Stuff like this and the Charisma stat makes me thing inXile wrote down ideas like "3 approaches to dialog" or "our attributes must spell CLASSIC" and never gave much thought into what they would actually do that in the game. I like my proposal for Charisma, but the obvious solution is removing the fucking attribute... but that would ruin the "C.L.A.S.S.I.C." spelling thing, that was apparently the core design drive here.

We go again into the territory of just who is the lead designer and why doesn't he comes forward to talk about this and other design choices, like aimed shots...

 

[Zombra]

Stuff like this and the Charisma stat makes me thing inXile wrote down ideas like "3 approaches to dialog" or "our attributes must spell CLASSIC" and never gave much thought into what they would actually do that in the game. I like my proposal for Charisma, but the obvious solution is removing the fucking attribute... but that would ruin the "C.L.A.S.S.I.C." spelling thing, that was apparently the core design drive here.

For the record, their original acronym was "SPLICES"
Some random forumite came up with CLASSIC.
Charisma needs a lot of love if it's going to be a worthwhile stat, but they didn't throw it in just for the awesome acronym.

 

[MLMarkland]

but they didn't throw it in just for the awesome acronym.

This.

Definitely plenty of room for improvement in multiple areas though, including charisma - thus the inquiry.

 

[hiver]

- The Hard-Ass (intimidate) approach should be achieved through force; you kill the guy's escort to intimidate him, or simply beat him into submission. Maybe use your kill count, like AoD does.
- Smart-Ass should be actually smart; players use their other skills like perception and computer hacking to find evidences needed to change the guy's mind, AND navigate the dialog well. I.e., the Master in Fallout 1.
- Kiss-Ass (persuasion) should be the only skill-based one, influenced by charisma, although still requiring cautious navigation of the dialog tree, not just clicking on the "I PERSUADE" icon.

- make hard ass dependant or influenced by... strength? or something.
- make Smart ass dependent on Intelligence
- make Kiss ass dependent on Charisma

?

Stuff like this and the Charisma stat makes me thing inXile wrote down ideas like "3 approaches to dialog" or "our attributes must spell CLASSIC" and never gave much thought into what they would actually do that in the game. I like my proposal for Charisma, but the obvious solution is removing the fucking attribute... but that would ruin the "C.L.A.S.S.I.C." spelling thing, that was apparently the core design drive here.

We go again into the territory of just who is the lead designer and why doesn't he comes forward to talk about this and other design choices, like aimed shots...

True but... never going to happen.

 

[Infinitron]

I find retarded that there are 3 skills for the exact same thing, each arbitrarily working in one place or another (reminds of the worst part of Long Live the Queen). I also find pointless to use dialog skills on NPCs that are nothing but enemies, like you do on the radio tower. K', I persuaded him to let me pass, what now? FUCKING NOTHING, they serve no purpose. I simply use the smart-ass reply for some XP, and then kill them for fun and MORE XP, just like that thing VD was talking about...

You're acting like this is some kind of bizarre unheard of approach, when the "Ass Trio" is really just the D&D Diplomacy/Bluff/Intimidate skill trio renamed. This is pretty standard stuff in RPG dialogue.

However, I think it is good to have a "diplomacy" skill when dealing with the citizens of the wasteland, being able to persuade them. But again, having three fucking skills for the same thing is pointless. Especially since you're taking three completely different approaches and making them work the same boring way:

- The Hard-Ass (intimidate) approach should be achieved through force; you kill the guy's escort to intimidate him, or simply beat him into submission. Maybe use your kill count, like AoD does.
- Smart-Ass should be actually smart; players use their other skills like perception and computer hacking to find evidences needed to change the guy's mind, AND navigate the dialog well. I.e., the Master in Fallout 1.
- Kiss-Ass (persuasion) should be the only skill-based one, influenced by charisma, although still requiring cautious navigation of the dialog tree, not just clicking on the "I PERSUADE" icon.

The way it is now is lazy, they collapsed all that into 3 skills that are used by clicking on marked boxes during dialog.

What dialogue tree? You're clicking a keyword.

I mean, they could make "dialogue navigation" more of a thing, but overall I'm not sure that was the intention with this game. Imagine that this was Wasteland 1 and you're standing on a tile next an NPC. You can press H to Hard-Ass him, K to Kiss-Ass him, or S to Smart-Ass him. That seems to be the kind of approach they were going for with the dialogue. It's not really "dialogue", it's just, like, a thing that you can do in the world with a skill.

Perhaps that's UNACCEPTABLE DESIGN IN OUR POST-FALLOUT WORLD, but, I don't think it's a fundamentally illegitimate approach if full blown NPC interaction simulation is not the game's focus.

By the way, why should Kiss-Ass still be skill-based in your system? I mean, you could de-skill that too. Sounds like you're looking for an equivalent to Fallout's Speech skill. In fact, your entire post could be summed up as "I want Fallout dialogue."

 

[undecaf]

I'm pretty sure stuff like that (scripted uses of Charisma in dialogue, etc) is already in the game. I think what inXile are looking for is something more systemic.

Oh I'm sure they had something like that there and I'm sure they had all those party limits and skillcaps in mind too in some fashion, but that's obviously not enough since unspecified (in style and amount) weight was asked under the attribute.

 

[Commissar Draco]

I haven't fleshed my idea out fully, but I thinking of suggesting a really gamey solution.

Characters have some kind of "aura" based on charisma. Below a certain threshold, it decreases nearby allies chance to succeed. Above a certain threshold it increases it. As it gets higher, the range increases. It would also stack with all near by allies.

This gives incentive for all rangers to have charisma. It doesn't reduce individuality by making charisma a group stat, and it means 4 rangers with 3 charisma is the not the same as 3 with 1 and 1 with 9. It allows the player to work around their characters skills in combat.

What do you guys think?

Like Voice Power in Centurion I like it; high Charisma Character inspire but his/her/its mere presence after all . How about items raising CHA like Peaked Caps of Awesomness or Realy, Realy Cool shades? In before magic clothes from F03 but even in real life people are more likely to fallow and trust Man in well tailored suit than hobo. Make Team Charisma the average of all rangers so you can do team of girl scouts bros or one leader with combat oriented grunts or one man army Champion who solo his enemies due to Emperor given inborn greatnes; Game has leader already when you pump your left Character with CHA and social skills and fill the rest with prerolled NPCs btw and having choice to play it Wastland 1 or Fallout would be great.

 

[hiver]

I dont mind the three dialogue ass skills.

They represent three different personalities to me. What i have a big problem with is that they didnt bring anything specific to the game in first beta i played.
(i managed to suck the new beta from teh internets yesterday - yay! murderous review incoming!)

And there was always another - very easy way - to do the same thing that ass skills were suppose to provide. instead of it being a unique option - at least in some cases.
Its all... fluff. Thats why i would try and tie them to some attributes in some ways, but then again... when you have a full party - you have all skills and all ass skills - which means that diversity can be achieved ONLY through creating specific content for them.

 

[Copper]

Well, I'm not a backer, so my ability to offer useful feedback is limited, and I'll just post here. However, I like tuluse and felipepepe's ideas - the idea that there is a sacrifice to be made beteen having a large group of average characters and an elite few physically powerful characters is very solid, and tweaking the survival element a bit more could also provide more interesting feedback here, with larger groups having a harder time surviving in the wastes due to limited resources, etc. I'd tie NPC followers to more specific influence traits though - some NPCs may not only be unlocked through specific skills, but also retire from the party if the party doesn't use their skills or do things 'their way'. The key goal is that certain NPCs like different things, so not everyone requires a Charismatic leader - some should respect strength, klls, or brains far more. Being able to provoke or appease NPCs in different ways could add much more reactivity to the game, as well.

For tuluse's idea, there are several possible elaborations. Firstly, you can emphasise the team nature of the game by allowing the party as a whole to acquire perks - think of the benefits to having a pack totem in Werewolf, or the party abilities in the new Warhammer. Every few levels, the party gets the ability to add a perk that affects their behaviour as a team - a 'Hold the Line' perk may give the team a melee defense bonus for every team member within X, with X being based on CHA, or 'Wolfpack' may allow for team members within X to trade places or deplete enemy AP in some way. By tying these to the abstract 'team' entity, no one is 'wasting' points on leadership duties, it represents a way of customising how the team plays, with a dedicated 'Lone Wolf' chain for the team of one.

It could also allow for teamwork in interactions where multiple characters have the same skill, etc, with some equivalency between CHA and skill level, so low CHA helpers are actually detrimental, and high CHA helpers can pool some of their skills together. Two average CHA rangers, for instance, could both contribute to a skill challenge one point higher than the lead's skill level, but a third ranger would actually spread them out too thin, and they wouldn't ba able to succeed. Conversely, a large group of high CHA rangers might be able to combine their efforts to overcome skill challenges significantly higher than the lead's skill level. A simpler, more abstract implementation could be someting similar to Storm of Zehire's dialogue, where based on a max set by CHA, any PCs who can contribute to an interaction can attempt to lower the difficulty one after another. The basic idea would be something like 4th ed's skill challenges, which, while deeply flawed for the PnP table, are an adequate mechanic for something like Wasteland 2.

 

[felipepepe]

You're acting like this is some kind of bizarre unheard of approach, when the "Ass Trio" is really just the D&D Diplomacy/Bluff/Intimidate skill trio renamed. This is pretty standard stuff in RPG dialogue.

On Pen and Paper RPGs, where you can declare what skill you'll use at any time and the GM decides the DC based on various circumstances. Only other cRPG I recall using the trio are the Neverwinter Nights games, and even at Obsidian hands they felt redundant and arbitrary.

What dialogue tree? You're clicking a keyword.

I mean, they could make "dialogue navigation" more of a thing, but overall I'm not sure that was the intention with this game. Imagine that this was Wasteland 1 and you're standing on a tile next an NPC. You can press H to Hard-Ass him, K to Kiss-Ass him, or S to Smart-Ass him. That seems to be the kind of approach they were going for with the dialogue. It's not really "dialogue", it's just, like, a thing that you can do in the world with a skill.

Perhaps that's UNACCEPTABLE DESIGN IN OUR POST-FALLOUT WORLD, but, I don't think it's a fundamentally illegitimate approach if full blown NPC interaction simulation is not the game's focus.

Don't be silly, of course there is a dialog tree, it just displays the start as well as the ramifications you uncover at the same time as the "roots". If you try convincing the Achtison chief about the bombs, you have to click on a keyword, then another one or two pops out, you click on those and more appear, until you reach the end of the tree and convince him. Yeah, you can type the ramification keywords before reaching it via dialog, but most times that's only possible via meta-knowledge; you wont go to the guard behind Vargas and type "promise" out of the blue so he gives you a gun.

And I would enjoy if I was able to hard-ass/kiss-ass/smart-ass any NPC at any time as you said, somewhat like Divinity 2 mind-reading, but the issue is that I can't. They are arbitrarily assigned, meaning that you have to master all 3 skills to do all dialog checks. The design seems intended as a skill point sink, to waste all the skills points you have in a large party... same thing with the lockpick/toaster repair/safe cracking or even unarmed/blunt/bladed... that way people either create a focused "diplomacy guy" or have to spread the skills through various party members.

By the way, why should Kiss-Ass still be skill-based in your system? I mean, you could de-skill that too. Sounds like you're looking for an equivalent to Fallout's Speech skill. In fact, your entire post could be summed up as "I want Fallout dialogue."

The current system is bad, I'm giving alternatives, just like they just asked us to do with Charisma. I don't get this pride in "we're doing our own stuff, even if it is worst!". Is not like the rest of the game is overflowing in original game mechanics anyway.

And my systems is more based on AoD than Fallout.

 

[Infinitron]

Don't be silly, of course there is a dialog tree, it just displays the start as well as the ramifications you uncover at the same time as the "roots". If you try convincing the Achtison chief about the bombs, you have to click on a keyword, then another one or two pops out, you click on those and more appear, until you reach the end of the tree and convince him. Yeah, you can type the ramification keywords before reaching it via dialog, but most times that's only possible via meta-knowledge; you wont go to the guard behind Vargas and type "promise" out of the blue so he gives you a gun.

And I would enjoy if I was able to hard-ass/kiss-ass/smart-ass any NPC at any time as you said, somewhat like Divinity 2 mind-reading, but the issue is that I can't.

This is true but irrelevant. My point is that the skills are abstractions of underlying dialogue. I don't think the game means to allow you to "roleplay" your way through a "Kiss Ass" approach via selection of the correct dialogue sentences. Instead it abstracts that into a "Kiss Ass" skill keyword. Again, a question of focus.

I guess I can see why one might view the "keyword tree" design that they're using as sort of an uncomfortable compromise between a true keyword system and full-on dialogue trees, but I just don't think it's so awful. My past with the Ultima series might have something to do with that.

you have to master all 3 skills to do all dialog checks. The design seems intended as a skill point sink, to waste all the skills points you have in a large party... same thing with the lockpick/toaster repair/safe cracking or even unarmed/blunt/bladed... that way people either create a focused "diplomacy guy" or have to spread the skills through various party members.

Yeah, and I don't have a problem with this. And what's wrong with being able to create a "diplomacy guy" with high Kiss Ass skill, a tough guy with high Hard Ass skill, etc? This is roleplaying.

I don't get this pride in "we're doing our own stuff, even if it is worst!". Is not like the rest of the game is overflowing in original game mechanics anyway.

I didn't say they were "doing their own stuff". Like I said, the dialogue skills are a pretty standard RPG thing.

 

[felipepepe]

This is true but irrelevant. My point is that the skills are abstractions of underlying dialogue. I don't think the game means to allow you to "roleplay" your way through a "Kiss Ass" approach via selection of the correct dialogue sentences. Instead it abstracts that into a "Kiss Ass" skill keyword. Again, a question of focus.

Fair enough, the focus on W2 is not dialog, I have no problem with that. But that's why having 3 redundant dialog skills and a social-only attribute like Charisma doesn't fit. Hurray, I can talk past the raiders on the Radio Tower through 3 different social skills! But it doesn't change anything, and there's nothing now to do with the raiders besides killing them for experience and loot.

And what's wrong with being able to create a "diplomacy guy" with high Kiss Ass skill, a tough guy with high Hard Ass skill, etc? This is roleplaying.

That would be cool, but only exist in LARP territory ATM. The 3 skills work in a vacuum, they are not affected by anything else; strength or kill count don't influence Hard-Ass; you can make your weakest guy the Hard-Ass one, or simply make a "diplomacy guy" that has all 3 skills. If instead of 3 dialog skills you had only one, but less points to spent, the result would be virtually the same, just less arbitrary and LARP-friendly.