Pathfinder Why Owlcat's Kingmaker Sucks, in Plain Language

[Sykar]

Yeah the stat bloat in Kingmaker is bullshit not gonna lie. Wolves be wearing full plate in these parts.

Only really a thing on Hard or Unfair difficulty. Challenging is almost like P&P with only minor bonus to enemy stats, mostly +2 armor, +2 saves and +2 hit

It's not just the stat bloat - it's the way the entire system is built where the fundamental progression system is indefinite AC/BAB stacking. You go from 20 AC to 40+ at least even while playing Challenging pretty casually, and so do your enemies more or less. It's just the name of the game, like JRPG enemies getting 8 million HP

Hardly any different from normal 3.5 or even 2nd where your THAC0 goes from 20 or 19 all the way down to 0. There it is even worse because means to improve armor class is far more limited than gains to THAC0. BG 2 proves that succintly where without Hardiness your tank becomes worthless in ToB because your THACO is like -5 while AC is basically capped at around -10. Only class to have a shot tanking via AC would be highly optimized Elven Mithril Chain wearing Blade Bard with Defensive Spin. Even then you would still want to have at least MI up. The rest? Hardiness or suffer a swift and merciless death. Oh and let us not forget 10 attacks per round Whirlwind attacks for extra lulz. Even without that you could reach something like 7-8 attacks via Imp Haste in BG2 even prior to ToB. Iirc 3 attacks via GM and dual wield, get a Belm off hand for 4 attacks per round, double that via Imp Haste and viola let the carnage begin.

 

[FreeKaner]

What do you mean it isn't that huge? There is at least 50% difference between two. The page gives 325HP, 34ac and these attributes: Str 33, Dex 25, Con 28, Int 22, Wis 26, Cha 27. That's an entire good d20 roll higher on everything. Moreover it takes it from being 50% above a d20 (I.E 34) to entirely exceeding two entire d20s (I.E 48).

You can't just look at numbers in a vacuum anyway, because basis of your system is d20, if your system is so that you are so ahead of the d20 that you would need more than 30 attack bonus to even qualify for an attack (I.E attacking without a natural 20 roll) that's definition of stat bloat. You are not even playing with enough of a dice anymore.

Having a "tank" that is invulnerable to damage except natural 20 rolls is not good design, it is the definition of MMO design. Going so far at the excess of 40+ rolls in a d20 is ridiculous. There is a reason why PNP version of these are so vary at going above 40 (I.E 2x the d20) even at level 20 enemies. Because doubling the d20 means that you need an entire bonus higher than the dice roll itself to even quality for the attack.

 

[Shadenuat]

this is going into realm of tall vs wide systems

and I don't have anything against wide but I find tall ones for all their faults have more autistic and thus more enjoyable number crunch and build fine tuning and thus end up with deeper charbuilding and players getting more invested.

 

[Sykar]

What do you mean it isn't that huge? There is at least 50% difference between two. The page gives 325HP, 34ac and these attributes: Str 33, Dex 25, Con 28, Int 22, Wis 26, Cha 27. That's an entire good d20 roll higher on everything. Moreover it takes it from being 50% above a d20 (I.E 34) to entirely exceeding two entire d20s (I.E 48).

You can't just look at numbers in a vacuum anyway, because basis of your system is d20, if your system is so that you are so ahead of the d20 that you would need more than 30 attack bonus to even qualify for an attack (I.E attacking without a natural 20 roll) that's definition of stat bloat. You are not even playing with enough of a dice anymore.

Yeah was much better in AD&D 2nd Ed. like in BG 2 where damage was mostly the same but you fought at half HP by comparison. Stuff like PW:Kill was essentially a game over button for anything mage or rouge.

 

[FreeKaner]

Well yes, it is indeed much better in BG2. Also that they forgot to scale PW:Kill from 100 hp to account for 50% HP bloat across the board doesn't mean it is better, in PFK it is not even worth memorising PW:Kill as a level 9 spell exactly because the system is so bloated. Simply again, you are rolling for attack and damage on a basis of d20, taking it to a point where you are exceeding the d20 twice is definition of bloat, there is no way around this. Look at the PNP versions of these lvl 19 and 20 creatures and see that they very rarely exceed 40 if ever. Now understand that there is a reason why the people designing these systems decided to not go over 40 even on legendary dragons that define the setting. Hint: it wasn't because writing 55AC on a system is hard.

 

[Pink Eye]

Have you by chance actually played the game? Because most enemies won't have hyper inflated stats unless they're golems. Most enemies can be easily beaten with simple prebuffing + haste. This game is mindlessly easy once you reach mid level content. That is a fact even on unfair. You can't refute this. We can look at pnp stats, but that is disingenuous, because balance from pnp doesn't approximate for the fact that you have 6 people. Which you have full and complete control over. 6 people of which you have full control over their builds as well. Enemy inflation is a cheap means of ensuring that they at least have a chance. Yet, that isn't even enough. By the way those golems I spoke of, Kingmaker doesn't have any of those until late game, and even then those enemies are scarce; due to the outcry people had with them. If the contention here is that the enemy inflation is too much, or such. Then lower the difficulty. The developers have given you multiple options and settings to match whatever experience you were hoping to get from the game.

 

[Gregz]

The developers have given you multiple options and settings to match whatever experience you were hoping to get from the game.

 

[Sykar]

Well yes, it is indeed much better in BG2. Also that they forgot to scale PW:Kill from 100 hp to account for 50% HP bloat across the board doesn't mean it is better, in PFK it is not even worth memorising PW:Kill as a level 9 spell exactly because the system is so bloated. Simply again, you are rolling for attack and damage on a basis of d20, taking it to a point where you are exceeding the d20 twice is definition of bloat, there is no way around this. Look at the PNP versions of these lvl 19 and 20 creatures and see that they very rarely exceed 40 if ever. Now understand that there is a reason why the people designing these systems decided to not go over 40 even on legendary dragons that define the setting. Hint: it wasn't because writing 55AC on a system is hard.

The defensive "bloat" is what keeps this game from the one round killfest high level AD&D 2nd offered, funny enough you ignore the bloat BG 2 had especially when it comes to attacks per round. WW for 10 attacks per round with freaking two handed weapon, say hi to my good friend Carsomyr, murderized anything but special act bosses like Yaga Shura or Mel. PW:Kill is not IWIN button anymore but a finisher that needs to used carefully.
There is no clear definition what "bloat" is. Where you does it begin? Quarter of a D20? Half? Full? 1 1/2? Who decides that, you?

 

[FreeKaner]

Have you by chance actually played the game? Because most enemies won't have hyper inflated stats unless they're golems. Most enemies can be easily beaten with simple prebuffing + haste. This game is mindlessly easy once you reach mid level content. That is a fact even on unfair. You can't refute this. We can look at pnp stats, but that is disingenuous, because balance from pnp doesn't approximate for the fact that you have 6 people. Which you have full and complete control over. 6 people of which you have full control over their builds as well. Enemy inflation is a cheap means of ensuring that they at least have a chance. Yet, that isn't even enough. By the way those golems I spoke of, Kingmaker doesn't have any of those until late game, and even then those enemies are scarce; due to the outcry people had with them. If the contention here is that the enemy inflation is too much, or such. Then lower the difficulty. The developers have given you multiple options and settings to match whatever experience you were hoping to get from the game.

That's exactly my argument though, because there is such uncontrolled character progression in the game that even the stat bloat will never catch up. Because the game allows the player exponential power growth but can only counter it by linear stat-bloat, which will never work. Because it doesn't matter that a legendary enemy has 48AC at 50% bloat over PNP, you can stack your lvl20 dazzling disploomer to 55AC. Your party are the strongest beings in the entire universe.

The stat bloated is not one-sided, it exists on both sides and itemisation as well. That's the issue, it takes away from deliberate usage of abilities and spells to stacking the biggest modifiers in the nicely decorated and illustrated expansive character screen. Giving into this allure of endless options necessarily gives way to stat bloat to counter act it. There is a reason why your story companions have such high stat buys, because otherwise they would become insolvent in the face of double the d20 stats they will face.

The game is not hard for me, as a fan of tactics and strategy I naturally tend towards munchkining, I research how I can stack bonuses and make my party best they can be. The fact that the game allows this to a point of absurdity over d20 so easily and so freely exactly takes away from the enjoyment of the game. The fact that you can make an invincible tank, to beat on slightly more vincible wolves of legend takes away the fun of the game.

This is contrary to a more reasonable and coherent game, where your characters easily die to PW:kill of enemy or can't get through its buffs if you didn't bring the means to remove them. It goes from playing the game in actuality to playing it in the character creation. Now as much as I love spending hours in character creation and starting more games than I finish, this purely and simply bad design. The developers should have tried to contained PFKs already bloated system that any PNP DM try to limit and cherrypick for the particular campaign they are designing, not allow you everything to make you such munchkin characters that they have to then slap an across the board 50% stat inflation to everything to counter-act, which is then not enough still.

Power is always relative. It's also better to create difficulty by creative design of encounters rather than stat-inflation fetish. Not every encounter needs to be brilliant, as PFK has great resource and time management mechanics to have space for attrition gameplay as well, so you can occasionally kill the bandits or kobolds en masse just to provide attrition but the fights that should matter shouldn't be because you have to stack +35AB to even make a roll against the AC of the inflation-fetish legendary enemy.

 

[LannTheStupid]

Why does this Turk write so much?

 

[FreeKaner]

The defensive "bloat" is what keeps this game from the one round killfest high level AD&D 2nd offered, funny enough you ignore the bloat BG 2 had especially when it comes to attacks per round. WW for 10 attacks per round with freaking two handed weapon, say hi to my good friend Carsomyr, murderized anything but special act bosses like Yaga Shura or Mel. PW:Kill is not IWIN button anymore but a finisher that needs to used carefully.
There is no clear definition what "bloat" is. Where you does it begin? Quarter of a D20? Half? Full? 1 1/2? Who decides that, you?

That BG2 also suffered from same issues is not an argument in favour of PF:K. It indeed did but it attempted to minimise it, even if not always successfully, simply because high level DND bends towards this.

I have no interest in the horse race of BG2 vs. PF:K, I think that PF:K does a lot of gameplay elements better than BG2 but when it comes to minutiae of the combat it is decisively suffering from more of the same issues that plagued BG2 at a level of severity that was unseen in it with very little alternative. The fact that you yourself admit you couldn't make a character which is invincible because you can manage to "skillfully" stack 55AC on munchkin companion with excess statbuy in BG2 shows that its problems were at a lesser degree.

 

[Shadenuat]

The developers should have tried to contained PFKs already bloated system that any PNP DM try to limit and cherrypick for the particular campaign they are designing, not allow you everything to make you such munchkin characters

so, when designing game based on Pathfinder system, you propose to NOT use its greatest strength and asset everyone loves it for - the super rich character building options; in favour of balance.

 

[Gregz]

Location: Russia

Spoiler

 

[Pink Eye]

>Because the game allows the player exponential power growth but can only counter it by linear stat-bloat, which will never work.
The developers have gone on record and said that they have learned from this, i.e. they learned from making enemies into stat sticks. They said that they are working on introducing different tactical elements based on difficulty.
Citation:
Q)What are the changes to the combat that you are the most excited about?
A)
Host: I am not sure if we can say.

Creative Director: For me it is new options that the mythic paths provides you with. We have also made enemies behave differently. For example for some of the creatures we are making their mechanics both interesting to play with, and very difficult to deal with. But it will also depend on the difficulty you chose for the game. If you are playing on the high difficulty, the enemy will have more abilities. If you are playing on the lower difficulty then some of the enemy's abilities will be turned off. Less focus on numbers.

Lead Mechanics Designer: I will also say that there will be different behaviors based on difficulty. Creature behavior was not the strongest part of the first game. This time around we tried to improve it. On the higher difficulties you should start seeing some interesting behavior from enemies.

Creative Director: There are many interesting ways for a creature to enter combat now. Unlike Kingmaker, where the enemy just stood there and waited for you to start the fight. Demons can now teleport and they like to teleport into the combat. Some of the creatures will want to climb over a wall, and ambush you. As a result you will have to be prepared.

Lead Mechanics Designer: Some of them on the higher difficulties for example can perform a coup de grace on you.
Creative Director: Some can paralyze you too.
Time Stamp: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/546778042?t=1h26m7s

Source: https://rpgcodex.net/forums/index.p...-kickstarter-live.130920/page-65#post-6528024

 

[Shadenuat]

I can only wonder how it will work and if they won't have to deadfire in the difficulty after release.

 

[Lawntoilet]

Why does this Turk write so much?

Turkish Loquaciousness; Disregard Repeatedly

 

[Pink Eye]

I can only wonder how it will work and if they won't have to deadfire in the difficulty after release.

I am more concerned as to who the developers will listen to the most. The people who play on unfair. Or those of the likes of Gregz and the Porkies, oink oink.

 

[Sykar]

The defensive "bloat" is what keeps this game from the one round killfest high level AD&D 2nd offered, funny enough you ignore the bloat BG 2 had especially when it comes to attacks per round. WW for 10 attacks per round with freaking two handed weapon, say hi to my good friend Carsomyr, murderized anything but special act bosses like Yaga Shura or Mel. PW:Kill is not IWIN button anymore but a finisher that needs to used carefully.
There is no clear definition what "bloat" is. Where you does it begin? Quarter of a D20? Half? Full? 1 1/2? Who decides that, you?

That BG2 also suffered from same issues is not an argument in favour of PF:K. It indeed did but it attempted to minimise it, even if not always successfully, simply because high level DND bends towards this.

I have no interest in the horse race of BG2 vs. PF:K, I think that PF:K does a lot of gameplay elements better than BG2 but when it comes to minutiae of the combat it is decisively suffering from more of the same issues that plagued BG2 at a level of severity that was unseen in it with very little alternative. The fact that you yourself admit you couldn't make a character which is invincible because you can manage to "skillfully" stack 55AC on munchkin companion with excess statbuy in BG2 shows that its problems were at a lesser degree.

You cannot get 55 AC against touch attacks. AC is also useless against anything magical. The biggest problem that the enemies were not build to use stuff like Shatter Defenses. There are ways to dismantle tanks but the AI is too limited to do this reliable and often enough. Of course then there is the problem that when your tank falls your team is bound to fall fairly quickly, too unless you have some CC layers up.
Last sentence is nonsense. Conservatively you can easily reach -10 and more on THAC0 That is the equivalent of at least +30 to attack. That is just with weapon and strength bonus on base THAC0 once you factor in buffs you can probably achieve +35 - +40 effectively. Sorry to burst your bubble but high level D&D was always "bloated". From 3.5 on though you got some scaling defense so shit is not automatically over when you win initiative.

 

[FreeKaner]

so, when designing game based on Pathfinder system, you propose to NOT use its greatest strength and asset everyone loves it for - the super rich character building options; in favour of balance.

You are again characterising it wrongly, I want the system to be more variable and allow for more character expression. That's why I am against them not pruning the possible stat-bloat. Which they have to counter-act by stat-bloating the enemies to not make the game trivial and it indeed becomes trivial if you are building correctly anyway. If you can stack 40AB and 55AC so easily, then they have to indeed balance enemies to meet 40AB and 55AC by inflating stats by at least 50% over PNP. You know what that does? It invalidates builds that don't stack 40AB and 55AC but would otherwise offer key solutions the encounter problems. Creation of this treadmill has to necessarily create a counter-balance that erases the rich character building options in favour of having to stack roll bonuses. Because if any character is behind the curve of the entire d20 of bonuses, they are going to be insolvent.

A game without resemblance of balance would not be fun to play, otherwise we would be like kids that recently discovered cheat codes in games playing god, that wears itself old very quickly don't you think? Power is relative, if your builds aren't statbloated over d20, then enemies don't have to be statbloated twice over d20, if they aren't statbloated twice over d20 then your builds can have more variety in utility and specialisation. You can then bring an inquisitor alongside eto be able to beat a lich, instead of sending your party with so much excess AB and AC over it that you can simply auto-attack it to death.

 

[Sykar]

so, when designing game based on Pathfinder system, you propose to NOT use its greatest strength and asset everyone loves it for - the super rich character building options; in favour of balance.

You are again characterising it wrongly, I want the system to be more variable and allow for more character expression. That's why I am against them not pruning the possible stat-bloat. Which they have to counter-act by stat-bloating the enemies to not make the game trivial and it indeed becomes trivial if you are building correctly anyway. If you can stack 40AB and 55AC so easily, then they have to indeed balance enemies to meet 40AB and 55AC by inflating stats by at least 50% over PNP. You know what that does? It invalidates builds that don't stack 40AB and 55AC but would otherwise offer key solutions the encounter problems. Creation of this treadmill has to necessarily create a counter-balance that erases the rich character building options in favour of having to stack roll bonuses. Because if any character is behind the curve of the entire d20 of bonuses, they are going to be insolvent.

A game without resemblance of balance would not be fun to play, otherwise we would be like kids that recently discovered cheat codes in games playing god, that wears itself old very quickly don't you think? Power is relative, if your builds aren't statbloated over d20, then enemies don't have to be statbloated twice over d20, if they aren't statbloated twice over d20 then your builds can have more variety in utility and specialisation. You can then bring an inquisitor alongside eto be able to beat a lich, instead of sending your party with so much excess AB and AC over it that you can simply auto-attack it to death.

I am getting a headache from this nonsense. Stat bloat is prevalent in almost any RPG be that cRPG or P&P once you get to a high enough level. Take any cRPG from Arcanum, where I can delete any enemy with a single Disintegrate with 100% success rate while teleporting from place to place, to any blobber like M&M where in the end you fly and teleport all over the map, dropping meteor showers by the dozen and killing dragons and archdemons like they are nothing. From zero to hero, or demi god, is the name of the game of like 95% of (c)RPG unless they are confined to low levels.

 

[Shadenuat]

u want more character expression

by removing character building options

It invalidates builds that don't stack 40AB and 55AC

that is untrue though: daidre just summoned skeletons. desiderious turned even trash characters to top ones by very fine party coordination and composition. and I just never pay any attention to AC at all. you can play ac game, but you can also drain them, cc them, fear them, kill em, etc.

 

[FreeKaner]

Last sentence is nonsense. Conservatively you can easily reach -10 and more on THAC0 That is the equivalent of at least +30 to attack. That is just with weapon and strength bonus on base THAC0 once you factor in buffs you can probably achieve +35 - +40 effectively. Sorry to burst your bubble but high level D&D was always "bloated". From 3.5 on though you got some scaling defense so shit is not automatically over when you win initiative.

I am very aware of this fact, that is why I prefer low level DND to high level ones, as I stated earlier. I also said that BG2 at least tried to contain it and had more interesting encounters as a result, not that they were entirely successful. By now everyone knows of rogue-dip kensai mage auto-attacking everything to death. This is not an argument in favour of anything though, this is indeed entirely my point that you yourself acknowledge so what are you trying to prove responding to me in a putative counter argument?

>Because the game allows the player exponential power growth but can only counter it by linear stat-bloat, which will never work.
The developers have gone on record and said that they have learned from this, i.e. they learned from making enemies into stat sticks. They said that they are working on introducing different tactical elements based on difficulty.

That's great and I am glad they learned unlike few here who are trying to prove otherwise, if they can add on the resource management of first game with more tactical combat then the second game will definitely be a much better and I am looking forward to it.

 

[Pink Eye]

My pure monks can beat the game on the highest difficulty! AND! Survive the prologue area on unfair + iron man mode!

 

[Gregz]

I am more concerned as to who the developers will listen to the most. The people who play on unfair. Or those of the likes of Gregz and the Porkies, oink oink.

You obviously didn't read my review, combat difficult was never something that I complained about. It's the other 997 design decisions that you conveniently ignore that makes this game trash.

I am amused that FreeKaner is pointing out some of the combat mechanics flaws however...yet you are still running to the defense of your silly game, and its incompetent developers.

You are literally spending all day, every day, bumping the topics in here with shill comment after shill comment. It's suspiciously over the top.

 

[Pink Eye]

Last sentence is nonsense. Conservatively you can easily reach -10 and more on THAC0 That is the equivalent of at least +30 to attack. That is just with weapon and strength bonus on base THAC0 once you factor in buffs you can probably achieve +35 - +40 effectively. Sorry to burst your bubble but high level D&D was always "bloated". From 3.5 on though you got some scaling defense so shit is not automatically over when you win initiative.

I am very aware of this fact, that is why I prefer low level DND to high level ones, as I stated earlier. I also sad that BG2 at least tried to contain it and had more interesting encounters as a result, not that they were entirely successful. By now everyone knows of rogue-dip kensai mage auto-attacking everything to death. This is not an argument in favour of anything though, this is indeed entirely my point that you yourself acknowledge so what are you trying to prove responding to me in a putative counter argument?

>Because the game allows the player exponential power growth but can only counter it by linear stat-bloat, which will never work.
The developers have gone on record and said that they have learned from this, i.e. they learned from making enemies into stat sticks. They said that they are working on introducing different tactical elements based on difficulty.

That's great and I am glad they learned unlike few here who are trying to prove otherwise, if they can add on the resource management of first game with more tactical combat then the second game will definitely be a much better and I am looking forward to it.

It remains to be seen though. With the introduction of the mythic system, there is going to be even more power bloat.