|
Masonity posted:How about int raising minimum damage while strength raises maximum damage? They want to keep damage ranges low to normalize combat results so I don't see this working.
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 12:13 |
|
|
uaciaut posted:- fighters don't get damage for str, they get it for int. Yeah, caster types have no interest in health. There's certainly no ranged combat in this game! When it comes to weight, the stash means that inventories are likely going to be very, very small. If consumables aren't toothless, there will probably be a lot of value in boosting STR just so you can drag a pile of potions around with you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
uaciaut posted:A) No, 2 or 3 points make a small difference, you get a +1 modifier for every 2 points anyway so a 3rd point would make no difference at all actually. And beyond what int i gave my figher char at start of NWN2 i never spend a drat point in it afterwards and i really doubt you'll see a single person who really understand the game that chooses a point of Int at the expense of a point of Str just for better will saves, it doesn't make any loving sense. He is talking about 4E, NWN 2 is 3.5E.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
If he thinks NWN2 is 4E that would explain a lot. But yes while we're correcting things, 4E Int has nothing to do with Will. Intelligence or Dexterity, whichever is higher, correlate to Reflex. Charisma or Wisdom for Will, Strength or Con for Fortitude. Dexterity is usually preferable to Intelligence because it determines Initiative as well, but sometimes Dexterity isn't convenient for other reasons like your race of choice buoying Intelligence so you might as well go for the cheaper Reflex gains that way. Or your class uses Intelligence as its primary damage determinant anyway (Swordmage). Or you use one of the various feats that alters the primary determinant of Initiative.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:08
|
|
|
SoggyBobcat posted:It depends on the equipped weapon. If I have a warhammer, I'm not trying to suss out weak points, I'm trying to hit the guy really hard and concuss him. Still you have a point: perhaps tie armour-piercing using light weapons to perception and heavy weapons to strength. If you have a warhammer, you don't need to find a weak spot or puncture the armor. A blunt weapon against a plate armor is, like, THE kind of weapon you want. It can blow up the organs of the dude under it and stuff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:10
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:If he thinks NWN2 is 4E that would explain a lot. Ye, that's my bad, thought NWN2 is 4e for some reason; don't really know much about 4e. My apologies friend  coffeetable posted:Yeah, caster types have no interest in health. There's certainly no ranged combat in this game! There is, but i doubt you'll want to keep your mage in the center of the fray. Beyond getting him one-shotted by the odd fighter-type that gets to him i doubt hp will have more use for a caster. You really shouldn't be forced to heavily invest in HP as a long-range caster though. Because if mages would have to invest a lot in Str for more HP then fighters probably wouldn't be able to afford to invest in anything else. And again re: weight being forced to go Str because you can't carry the minimum required would be, imo a bad decision.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:19
|
|
|
Furism posted:If you have a warhammer, you don't need to find a weak spot or puncture the armor. A blunt weapon against a plate armor is, like, THE kind of weapon you want. It can blow up the organs of the dude under it and stuff. Are you disagreeing with me or...? The faster/harder you swing the weapon, the more force is being transferred through the armour and into the opponent. That's the justification behind the idea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:19
|
|
|
If you have low intelligence you think those giant-headed mauls in fantasty art are warhammers. High int means you know to look for the small-headed ones.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:24
|
|
|
Casters only have no interest in strength if there is nothing in the game that lets a caster benefit from a high strength pool. Health aside, what if high strength gives you access to traits which let you cast faster while wearing heavier armour? etc. This is the state system. It has to be viewed in the context of the character system. We do not have the rest - we can assume that josh and his bros will have sat down and actually said "OK, how do we make these stats all have some kind of appeal for most builds without homogenising them".
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:26
|
|
|
uaciaut posted:That's fine, i've nothing against specialization in general, but i said that if you look at mages for examples Str has CLEARLY no benefit as a stat for them, it's completely a dump stat for them from the get go, The NPC wizard character that's in our default testing party has a low Str and it is not uncommon for him to dive perilously close to death in a single combat. I can keep healing his Stamina throughout the fight, but if his Health goes down, it's not coming back up. I do think that it's an accurate criticism to say that Strength is currently more of a strategic concern than a tactical concern, but I definitely would not dump it on a wizard as-is. uaciaut posted:There is, but i doubt you'll want to keep your mage in the center of the fray. Beyond getting him one-shotted by the odd fighter-type that gets to him i doubt hp will have more use for a caster. rope kid fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Dec 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
uaciaut posted:Because if mages would have to invest a lot in Str for more HP then fighters probably wouldn't be able to afford to invest in anything else. quote:And again re: weight being forced to go Str because you can't carry the minimum required would be, imo a bad decision. e: f,b
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
uaciaut posted:And again re: weight being forced to go Str because you can't carry the minimum required would be, imo a bad decision. I'm pretty sure the current design is that anything equipped (including your alternate weapons) doesn't count against your personal inventory. Strength is gonna effect your ability to carry around a bandolier of potions, not your ability to perform your basic combat functions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:38
|
|
|
SurrealityCheck posted:Casters only have no interest in strength if there is nothing in the game that lets a caster benefit from a high strength pool. Casters have the same interest in HP pool as any other non-fighter class - to have it as low as possible so they can survive unexpected situations (AOE or any fighter getting through to them) and that's it. It's not a stat they would look for to define their class or specialization, as you can say about a high-Int warrior that would look to increase his damage via int. This probably falls more into the discussion of defensive stats vs offensive stats since you generally want just enough defensive stats to be able to survive a fight and you generally don't look for a specific cap on an offensive stat. This is especially true for non-frontline types, which casters are. SurrealityCheck posted:Health aside, what if high strength gives you access to traits which let you cast faster while wearing heavier armour? etc. And maybe you'll need 100 resolve on your fighter to fight the final boss and finish the game! This isn't about how you make up for bad design choices by forcing people to take a stat they don't want to take through feat requirements and other baits, if the only reason you're taking a stat is to get to a certain feat and otherwise the stat is crap then something's not made right. And of course i'm dealing in the info that's being given and not in "what if"'s. rope kid posted:Of course, you don't want your wizard in the center of the fray, but that doesn't always work out. And even in IWD we had ranged characters relentlessly target casters. This is true but like i said earlier in this post defensive stats are, imo at least, inferior to offensive stats because you always look for a cap with them, especially for non-fighter types. Well inferior isn't the right word here, but you get my point i hope D: I just envisioned int having a better impact by affecting all combat stats by a smaller ammount instead of simply "taking" the damage affect from Str a better decision, with further feat/skill choices allowing players to further increase int effectiveness on a given combat star or not. That's just me. Anyway regardless of all my constant bitching and whining i'm p confident in you guys and i'll play the gently caress out of that game anyway, thanks for taking the time (and nerves possibly) to reply to my poo poo mr. rope kid. uaciaut fucked around with this message at 17:51 on Dec 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:41
|
|
|
Male Man posted:I'm pretty sure the current design is that anything equipped (including your alternate weapons) doesn't count against your personal inventory. Strength is gonna effect your ability to carry around a bandolier of potions, not your ability to perform your basic combat functions. I was wondering if it would effect your ability to carry around a second weapon too. Which could be interesting, if combat is designed in such a way that it rewards switching up. uaciaut posted:Casters have the same interest in HP pool as any other non-fighter class - to have it as low as possible so they can survive unexpected situations (AOE or any fighter getting through to them) and that's it. It's not a stat they would look for to define their class or specialization, as you can say about a high-Int warrior that would look to increase his damage via int. Utterly depends on the type of caster. Cyphers are close range, as are paladins. Based on what we know, priests, druids and chanters can be, as could a wizard if you wanted to build them that way. The only pure ranged class, by the sound of it, is the ranger, and even then, you might want some strength to toughen up your companion. CottonWolf fucked around with this message at 17:45 on Dec 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:42
|
|
|
Rope kid, how does a high STR/low CON warrior class play like? My initial assumption when I read what the stats do and the health/stamina dynamic is that a character that wants to be in the thick of the fighting would be better off investing in CON over STR, but now I'm not so sure.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:42
|
|
|
Male Man posted:If you have low intelligence you think those giant-headed mauls in fantasty art are warhammers. High int means you know to look for the small-headed ones. Haha, yeah this. Warhammers were made with smaller heads so you can pierce armor. But I think PoE will have them as "traditional" with bigger heads because of recognition and pixels or something.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
SoggyBobcat posted:Rope kid, how does a high STR/low CON warrior class play like? My initial assumption when I read what the stats do and the health/stamina dynamic is that a character that wants to be in the thick of the fighting would be better off investing in CON over STR, but now I'm not so sure. The way I understand it, Con is your ability to survive the fight you're in, while Strength will govern your ability to survive multiple fights, because as encounters continue Health will drop and not be replenished until you get proper rest, while Stamina gets refreshed frequently. So a low STR warrior would play similarly to a high STR warrior, but would have a smaller golfbag for weapon/potion/special item tactical options in the moment and wouldn't be able to hold up in extended dungeon crawling as well. marshmallow creep fucked around with this message at 17:51 on Dec 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
Lotish posted:So a low STR warrior would play similarly to a high STR warrior, but would have a smaller golfbag for weapon/potion/special item tactical options and wouldn't be able to hold up in extended dungeon crawling as well. In my mind, it's that a low STR character has to play much more defensively to make sure she doesn't take much damage in the first place. A high STR character meanwhile can go down to 1 stamina every fight and shrug it off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
SoggyBobcat posted:Rope kid, how does a high STR/low CON warrior class play like? My initial assumption when I read what the stats do and the health/stamina dynamic is that a character that wants to be in the thick of the fighting would be better off investing in CON over STR, but now I'm not so sure.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
Lotish posted:The way I understand it, Con is your ability to survive the fight you're in, while Strength will govern your ability to survive multiple fights, because as encounters continue Health will drop and not be replenished until you get proper rest, while Stamina gets refreshed frequently. So a low STR warrior would play similarly to a high STR warrior, but would have a smaller golfbag for weapon/potion/special item tactical options in the moment and wouldn't be able to hold up in extended dungeon crawling as well. And, in theory, a low CON fighter could be propped up by a paladin or priest healing them, whereas a low STR fighter couldn't. e: Beaten by rope kid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
rope kid posted:Well, I've seen more than a few people expressing dissatisfaction over fighters being slow-and-steady defender types. If you want to be a melee character who hops around and breaks engagement and ganks someone for a boatload of damage before getting smacked hard and falling down, play a rogue. Rogues in PE aren't "Oi Govna" street urchins who pick pockets as their main profession. They're skirmishers and opportunistic killers (whether soldiers or actual thugs/assassins) in the vein of Bronn. Rogues tend to turn me away due to reliance on stealth. Are Rogues in PoE the fast kind or the slow kind?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:56
|
|
|
Jackard posted:I've always preferred fast melee classes in these games, like 3e Swashbucklers or 4e Rangers or WoW Fury Warriors Rogues do get Escape, which allows them to break Melee Engagement 1/encounter, which is pretty darn useful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:02
|
|
|
rope kid posted:Low Str wizards are extremely fragile. Even if they have a lopsided pair of Con/Str scores where Con is through the roof and Str is low, their derived Health (from Str) is still very low. They can take more damage before they need to heal Stamina, but the total amount of damage they can take before being maimed/killed (depending on difficulty) is really low. And then I start thinking about a tank-y character, and it just kinda seems like a false choice. Like, you can pump that con all you want, but without strength, you're kinda... well, you've got a hard cap on how much you can tank determined by your strength stat, so you just pump them in tandem to whatever ratio works for you, and it just reads to me as being limited in a way that nothing else really does. Or maybe it's just me, I'm the idiot. The Crotch fucked around with this message at 18:05 on Dec 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
The way I'm seeing it it looks like the effectiveness of strength is tied to how easy or difficult it is to rest between encounters. Too easy and it becomes a borderline dump stat, too hard and it becomes a priority.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:06
|
|
|
How are the formations coming along? Will our valiant heroes still go through door rear end first, wizard style, foregoing any semblance of tactics? Are they going to be adjustable, like ToEE?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:07
|
|
|
SoggyBobcat posted:The way I'm seeing it it looks like the effectiveness of strength is tied to how easy or difficult it is to rest between encounters. Too easy and it becomes a borderline dump stat, too hard and it becomes a priority. Yeah, or it could just become the effort stat. If resting requires backtracking, it's the backtrack/continue trade-off stat. Putting aside the whole consumables aspect.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:07
|
|
|
Mortal Sword posted:
Platinum level contributors ($10,000 or more) will in fact get the opportunity to suck Josh Sawyer's dick.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:07
|
|
|
So if I read this correctly the sweet spot for a Fighter would be to not have so little Con that the Stamina regen is "wasted" on a full Stamina bar, but not low enough you have to keep healing him? I don't think the combat will be tuned to precisely this is achievable but, as I understand, you don't want to "waste" regen on a full bar.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:07
|
|
|
uaciaut posted:Casters have the same interest in HP pool as any other non-fighter class - to have it as low as possible so they can survive unexpected situations (AOE or any fighter getting through to them) and that's it. It's not a stat they would look for to define their class or specialization, as you can say about a high-Int warrior that would look to increase his damage via int. This is absolutely true (and one of the many reasons I hate defensive stats in RPGs) and I quote:And maybe you'll need 100 resolve on your fighter to fight the final boss and finish the game! This isn't about how you make up for bad design choices by forcing people to take a stat they don't want to take through feat requirements and other baits, if the only reason you're taking a stat is to get to a certain feat and otherwise the stat is crap then something's not made right. That's not what I meant at all. Sure, you could make things have arbitrary stat requirements - but what I more meant was that stats can be the gateway to other things other than their pure effects, and many of the most interesting effects will probably be unlocked through those!
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
Disco Infiva posted:How are the formations coming along? Will our valiant heroes still go through door rear end first, wizard style, foregoing any semblance of tactics? Are they going to be adjustable, like ToEE?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:17
|
|
|
This is like the fighter/rogue thing, but obviously far more aggravating to people. STR/DEX/CON/INT are just forever bound to decades and decades of D&D expectations. Just change the names already, Christ. I don't think anyone would freak out if the mechanics were exactly as they've been described, but the stats were called Brawn, Nimbleness, Resilience, and Cunning instead. I think Cunning is a good replacement for INT as a 'damage' stat, anyway. It's obviously a mental stat, but it clearly has a bit of a combat slant to it: "A cunning blow!", etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:18
|
|
|
rope kid posted:If you want a fast moving class, barbarians get Wild Sprint (limited use, but very fast) and monks inherently move faster (a li'l) in combat. If you want a fast-attacking character, use weapons classified as Fast, like daggers, stilettos, rapiers, etc. Murderbarian here I come.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:18
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:This is like the fighter/rogue thing, but obviously far more aggravating to people. STR/DEX/CON/INT are just forever bound to decades and decades of D&D expectations. Just change the names already, Christ. Honestly, yeah, the most elegant solution here seems to be just changing the name of the particular stat(s) causing the argument. Nobody seems to be bothered by how they work, all the debate has hinged on the terminology used to describe it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
... I'm mildly irritated by how they work?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:33
|
|
|
Disco Infiva posted:How are the formations coming along? Will our valiant heroes still go through door rear end first, wizard style, foregoing any semblance of tactics? Are they going to be adjustable, like ToEE? Would we be able to have an <attack_at_destination> option or anything? I like being able to (in one click without having to wait) tell a dude to walk or run over somewhere and engage an enemy from that future destination.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:34
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:This is like the fighter/rogue thing, but obviously far more aggravating to people. STR/DEX/CON/INT are just forever bound to decades and decades of D&D expectations. Just change the names already, Christ. I'd have problems with all of those. Or to be more precise they aren't that intuitive to me either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:35
|
|
|
Masonity posted:How about int raising minimum damage while strength raises maximum damage? Jesus loving Christ. How about we don't change anything about a system we haven't played yet because we don't like the way a single attribute is named. For fucks sake a naming issue is not cause to change the gameplay of a system none of us have actually played with, and which on paper, and according to the people who have played with it is awesome. "I don't like the damage stat being called Intelligence" is not cause to overhaul the guts of the entire character system, and certainly not cause to call for the system to be overhauled. Attributes influencing stuff you wouldn't expect is what happens when you build something that's supposed to work. Abstraction is good, because it stops a system from becoming stupid by trying to make the by-definition abstract stats "make sense". It's a natural consequence of a well designed system. DatonKallandor fucked around with this message at 18:45 on Dec 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
Here's a thought for posters that want smashing characters: Have a mechanic for melee attacks (since weapon choice is not really class specific) that let you burn health to do extra damage. You literally fight harder not smarter, because you wear down long term health with muscle strain and injury by hitting like a train.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:42
|
|
|
Mortal Sword posted:Honestly, yeah, the most elegant solution here seems to be just changing the name of the particular stat(s) causing the argument. Nobody seems to be bothered by how they work, all the debate has hinged on the terminology used to describe it. Name them in the in game languages!
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 12:13 |
|
|
SurrealityCheck posted:Name them in the in game languages! I vote that intelligence is called "Úrf". Your Úrf determines how hard you hit and how well you examine and recall facts in conversation/out-of-combat events.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:46
|
|