|
Now that I think about it, Hunters kind of worry me about their design. So lets just talk about Hunters in PoE. I'm fine with Hunters as a pet using class, but pet reliant is a different story. Given the bond that will exist in PoE, I can tell you I'll never run a Ranger in my group. Ever. The combination of pet AI in video games often being borderline retarded so I've experienced events like: vanish on cutscene load, can't pathfind around danger areas/traps, fall behind a moving party (especially with buffs), get stuck behind objects or doors, are susceptible to AoE by definition because there's two targets to hit, can't use equipment which leads to scaling issues, balancing a ranged class that is also in melee without making either half weak and easy to crush, and that their health pool is shared combined with all these possible pet issues, no thanks. That sounds like 100% hassle. I don't see one single upside to that class as it's written on paper. If you sat me down in character creation and said, "Given what you know about the hunter, you can also have a Cipher or Bard or" I'd take or. If you take health sharing out, you might end up with a class that has a throwaway animal companion that you sacrifice to off-tank a boss or something. Great lore for, say, a dabbler of undead and demons. Not so great for caring for nature and little woodland creatures. It seems the health sharing mechanic is a way to tie the pet to the character so that the pet is always a concern and is integral to the class. That might be to heavy handed though in implementation, because it definitely turns me away from the class immediately. I'd be far more interested in a ranged death dealer over dealing with some dude and his pet who can't keep up and gets stuck on doors. Wizardry ranged classes are a good example of ranged death dealers by the way. They didn't need pets. Just double crossbows.
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 23:02 |
|
|
fez_machine posted:Unless you're the type of person who wants to turn social interaction into a mechanistic war game. I suddenly have an immense longing for a political/courtroom simulation RPG. Are there any at all? User0015 posted:...The combination of pet AI in video games often being borderline retarded so I've experienced events like: vanish on cutscene load, can't pathfind around danger areas/traps, fall behind a moving party (especially with buffs), get stuck behind objects or doors... Presumably you'll be controlling the pet directly, so that shouldn't be too much of an issue. Besides, I can't see why the AI would be any worse than that of your other party members. CottonWolf fucked around with this message at 00:51 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
CottonWolf posted:I suddenly have an immense longing for a political/courtroom simulation RPG. Are there any at all? Crusader Kings 2 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:Crusader Kings 2 An incredible game, but sorely lacking in one-on-one word battles. I want to skewer someone with a reductio ad absurdum, dammit!
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
CottonWolf posted:I suddenly have an immense longing for a political/courtroom simulation RPG. Are there any at all? Only the greatest one of all: Sea Dracula http://seadracula.wordpress.com/
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
fez_machine posted:Traditionally, the roleplaying aspect of D&D has existed around the combat simulation, the rules exist in pretty much every edition of D&D to simulate combat. All 4e did was make combat into a board game rather than war gaming derived simulation. Its hard to say that. It really depended on the players/GM and what they wanted out of their experience. It wasn't uncommon for me to end up like this every Saturday night at my local B&N Bookstore: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gs2VYL-3RI
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
Berk Berkly posted:Its hard to say that. It really depended on the players/GM and what they wanted out of their experience. It wasn't uncommon for me to end up like this every Saturday night at my local B&N Bookstore: It really isn't. If it needed strong mechanical support, anyone who wanted to do those things would have been SOL because there never has been such support. It's a testament to how bad skill points were that 4E Skill Training, mediocre as it is, is an improvement.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 01:07
|
|
|
I meant it less that the social aspect of the game needed heavy mechanical support, and more that a finely tuned & balanced class is way less important in a social tabletop game like Dungeons & Dragons than it is in a game like World of Warcraft where classes need to be balanced against PVP, PvE, and raid groups. If I have a decent DM, it doesn't really matter if my fighter or ranger is optimized. The rules are flexible enough to work around it, and because they aren't so finely tuned, you have more room for interpretation and creativity. I know the initial reaction my group had to 4e was that it seemed like they had misplaced their priorities and overvalued the combat aspect of the game, as though finely tuned classes and slick combat were the big selling points. The most fun we ever had was playing a Fallout campaign and the rules for that were convoluted and awful - what made it great was the social interaction between the players, and the story presented by the DM. Maybe I don't want to play a WICCKKEDD SICKK videogame-inspired warlock; maybe I want to play something with looser and less optimized rules that nevertheless gives me more flexibility in how I develop my character. Similarly, if I'm playing a single player RPG then I don't really care if one class is suboptimal or comparatively weak, because I'm going to play it anyway if that's the RP flavour I'm looking for. e. Or to put it another way, our reaction to 4e was that they were trying way too hard to make D&D combat seem like a video game, which probably makes sense from a game design perspective, but to us seemed like they were trying to make it all a little too slick & simple. unlimited shrimp fucked around with this message at 01:24 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 01:15
|
|
|
D&D roleplaying as a thing is actually an evolution from strategic and tactical war gaming after action reports. People doing what Let's Players of Crusader Kings 2 do, but in fanzines. If your interested in this stuff, you should probably read Playing At The World: http://www.amazon.com/Playing-at-World-Jon-Peterson/dp/0615642047/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1391559439&sr=8-1&keywords=Playing+At+The+world But essentially, my argument is, who cares what the combat role of the character is because it is fundamentally separate from what you do when you're not playing the combat part of the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
bathroom sounds posted:I meant it less that the social aspect of the game needed heavy mechanical support, and more that a finely tuned & balanced class is way less important in a social tabletop game like Dungeons & Dragons than it is in a game like World of Warcraft where classes need to be balanced against PVP, PvE, and raid groups. Yeah but at that point there's no real point in playing D&D of any variety. There are systems that accomplish that far better than any edition.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
bathroom sounds posted:Some people enjoy the roleplaying aspect of D&D as much or more than the combat simulation I'm not really sure how that's relevant to what you're responding to, which is that claiming that PoE rangers are "just like WoW Hunters because even though D&D had archer rangers with pets WoW 'popularized it" is equivalent to people who claimed D&D 4E was "like WoW" for also having things that WoW took from D&D in the first place, things that existed in prior editions, etc. fez_machine posted:Traditionally, the roleplaying aspect of D&D has existed around the combat simulation, the rules exist in pretty much every edition of D&D to simulate combat. All 4e did was make combat into a board game rather than war gaming derived simulation. quote:Roleplaying, at least in D&D, has never had nor needed strong mechanical support. Unless you're the type of person who wants to turn social interaction into a mechanistic war game. *On the internet, they usually mean "casting overpowered wizard spells", but that's another story. LogicNinja fucked around with this message at 01:31 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 01:27
|
|
|
bathroom sounds posted:e. The big goal was actually to make sure that cool stuff wasn't concentrated in the hands of any class or set of classes and that every class could be good at what they do in & out of combat and not made redundant. "Like a video game" doesn't really mean anything, considering that Myst, Dishonored, Street FIghter, and EVE Online are all video games. Balance can be looser in tabletop, or in a one-player video game, but it still matters--if your FIghter is sitting every other fight out while the Cleric smashes faces because enemies have "Will save or sit still/lose control/run away for 14 rounds" auras and spells, that's no fun for the FIghter. If your party's plans to pull off impressive heists revolve mostly around the wizard casting invisibility, flight, detect thoughts, Charm Person, Suggestion, etc etc, then that's no fun for the Rogue. Likewise in a one-player game, if you're playing a Rogue you want to be able to do cool Rogue stuff, rather than go "man, I wish I had this other class's abilities, they're much better for the stuff I want to do." LogicNinja fucked around with this message at 01:33 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 01:31
|
|
|
CottonWolf posted:Presumably you'll be controlling the pet directly
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
rope kid posted:Yes. You control animal companions directly and on area transitions they always appear immediately next to their ranger. To get this back on topic, what's the range of animal companions? Are things like ferrets, ravens, cats, etc available, and if so, can you have them help you out outside of fights--distract people, keep watch, steal stuff, etc? That was always my favorite thing about animal companions that aren't bears*, familiars, etc. *My favorite thing about animal companions that are bears is having a goddamn bear. LogicNinja fucked around with this message at 01:38 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
Plus, until we have some ridiculously advanced learning AI and procedurally generated content that isn't largely boring and lovely a computer cannot in any way be as good a DM as a human being. It can't adapt to give different people time to shine, or compensate for weaknesses in the system because it is literally defined by that system. You can't roleplay dynamic social situations in a computer game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
rope kid posted:Yes. You control animal companions directly and on area transitions they always appear immediately next to their ranger. Will they have some A.I. components or passives? Like if the Ranger attacks something, can you set it up so that they auto-charge that target as well or will we have to micro them constantly?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
LogicNinja posted:Balance can be looser in tabletop, or in a one-player video game, but it still matters--if your FIghter is sitting every other fight out while the Cleric smashes faces because enemies have "Will save or sit still/lose control/run away for 14 rounds" auras and spells, that's no fun for the FIghter. If your party's plans to pull off impressive heists revolve mostly around the wizard casting invisibility, flight, detect thoughts, Charm Person, Suggestion, etc etc, then that's no fun for the Rogue. I mean I guess games should be designed to minimize people's shittiness but if you're in a group that's actively cockblocking you then that sucks for reasons beyond game mechanics. LogicNinja posted:To get this back on topic, what's the range of animal companions? Are things like ferrets, ravens, cats, etc available, and if so, can you have them help you out outside of fights--distract people, keep watch, steal stuff, etc? That was always my favorite thing about animal companions that aren't bears*, familiars, etc. Though that's more workable in a tabletop game than a video game. I can't really remember how familiars worked in BG2.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
ropekid I have a feature request for the ranger's Animal Companion https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnryOUNnlWk
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
From the updatequote:Both the ranger and the animal companion die if their Health is reduced to zero. rope kid posted:Yes. You control animal companions directly and on area transitions they always appear immediately next to their ranger.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
bathroom sounds posted:Though that's more workable in a tabletop game than a video game. I can't really remember how familiars worked in BG2. A mage can summon a familiar using Find Familiar. The familiar is random from a selection of different pets, they all have different abilities, like a cat can use stealth, a mephit has I think color spray, etc. If your familiar dies the mage loses one point of constitution permanently. That's about it, they weren't a huge part of the game iirc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
Zore posted:You can't roleplay dynamic social situations in a computer game. Yes you can. It just takes huge, extensive design ahead of time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:Yes you can. It just takes huge, extensive design ahead of time. The whole game could be said to embody a dynamic social situation. It certainly felt that way with FO:NV. Smaller scale and condensed examples might be the huge Dialog "Boss Battles" in things like the court-scene in NW2:O or in the middle of KotoR II. I had fun with those.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
I'd like to hear less about World of Warcraft in this thread and more about Pillars of Eternity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 02:42
|
|
|
bathroom sounds posted:My core complaint is that I hate using pets in combat and I'm sad to see PoE decide to make combat animal companions integral to the ranger class. Disco Infiva posted:How about giving the ranger a passive ability that disables animal companion and gives you some other bonuses or something. You can call it "Lone Ranger"
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
I was curious if its possible to have multiple pets active simultaneously, or have a group of pets that are treated as a single pet, like a swarm of bees or a pack of terriers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:01
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:Yes you can. It just takes huge, extensive design ahead of time. I meant dynamic in the same sense as a tabletop game. Fallout: New Vegas doesn't let you bring a Follower of the Apocalypse, or a Brotherhood of Steel member, to help you repair ED-E. You can't team up with the Powder Gangers to take out the Khans, or resolve the inital quest line in Goodsprings without murdering a ton of people. And that's absolutely fine. Fallout: New Vegas is a great game with a lot of choice & consequence stuff. But technology and the sheer amount of effort/writing it would take to make a truly reactive non-procedurally generated game is ridiculous. And that's why classes and poo poo need to be more balanced in a computer game, because a computer can't give the Ranger some time to shine if he's been overshadowed by everyone else. Or let their crazy, off the wall idea work to get the player re-invested in the game like a person can.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
Simply changing the pet from an off-tank to a source of extra damage for the ranger (at the cost of increased risk to the ranger) should change up the playstyle quite a bit, I should think, even if the rest of the mechanics are similar. So its a good thing that this was a thing that was done, but everyone seemed to ignore that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
Oh, and before I forget:rope kid posted:If you want Obsidian to make a classless skill-based game, I certainly won't object (especially if it's a historical game -- classless skill-based games are what I make and prefer to play on my own time), but those proposals always seem to go over like a lead balloon. Maybe after the rousing success of the Kingdom Come kickstarter as a interest check in historical, explicitly unfantastical games, that attitude will start to change.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:09
|
|
|
I think the most important question - will I be able to mod boobs and anime hair onto my pet if I'm playing a hunter? e: Lotish posted:Maybe after the rousing success of the Kingdom Come kickstarter as a interest check in historical, explicitly unfantastical games, that attitude will start to change. Seriously, rope kid, even if you did Josh Sawyer presents Josh Sawyer's Pillars of Historical Combat Unfantastical Game I'd back it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
bathroom sounds posted:That sounds more like a bad DM and/or bad friends problem than a game design problem. It makes sense for the party to use the most effective tools they have on hand. In the short term, Joe the Rogue loves it when the wizard uses Spider Climb, Detect Thoughts, Suggestion, and Invisibility to pull off a heist or something because he shares the loot. In the long term, those spells make Joe the Rogue almost completely redundant, especially since the DM needs to put in spell defenses to prevent the party from doing that to everybody (and to have an answer to the question of "why doesn't every second-rate wizard in the kingdom do this") which Joe the Rogue has no way to deal with. I don't really see how "one character's abilities shouldn't make them better than other characters in those characters' areas of expertise" translates to. In D&D 3E in particular this happened a lot as a combination of the huge buff casters got compared to 2E and the terrible skill system, for example. I think that's bad form, and I think even in a one-player game I don't want Class A to do most of what Class B does but better. That leads to people needing to make choices like "do I take the strong companion or the flavorful companion" or avoiding some PC classes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:12
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:I think the most important question - will I be able to mod boobs and anime hair onto my pet if I'm playing a hunter? C'mon, dude. One at a time. That one can come after gently caress You: Suck My Dick: Josh Sawyer's Personal Dream RPG Experience.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
If Obsidian ever implements mounted combat in one of PoE expansions, bear cavalry should be a thing for rangers and druids, with rangers also being bear archers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
Speaking of, I sort of hope Druids get some ridiculous shapeshift forms. I'd love to see some Eldritch abominations or weird hybrid nightmares of teeth, claws and spider legs. Though really as long as they can turn into something outside the big four (Giant cat/Bear/Wolf/Spider) I'll be extremely happy. I might even play one after my Ranger/Chanter runs. (Land Sharks/Land Octopuses Ropekid. You know you want too)
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
My favorite thing about bears is how round their ears are. If we're talking about bears. Seriously, roundest ears in the animal kingdom. e: Fig 1 - LogicNinja fucked around with this message at 03:27 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
My favorite thing about bears is how cute and fuzzy they are but can maul you into fine paste in about 2 seconds flat. And don't even think about running away, since they are pretty fast too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
LogicNinja posted:My favorite thing about bears is how round their ears are. If we're talking about bears. Seriously, roundest ears in the animal kingdom. Round ears good, pointy ears better!
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
Drifter posted:Round ears good, pointy ears better! This puts an elf ranger in possibly a bit of a bind, because by the game mechanics, she is the bear!
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:40
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:Seriously, rope kid, even if you did Josh Sawyer presents Josh Sawyer's Darklands 2 I'd back it. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:43
|
|
|
User0015 posted:I'm fine with Hunters as a pet using class, but pet reliant is a different story. Given the bond that will exist in PoE, I can tell you I'll never run a Ranger in my group. Ever. The combination of pet AI in video games often being borderline retarded so I've experienced events like: vanish on cutscene load, can't pathfind around danger areas/traps, fall behind a moving party (especially with buffs), get stuck behind objects or doors,
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 23:02 |
|
|
Lotish posted:This puts an elf ranger in possibly a bit of a bind, because by the game mechanics, she is the bear! She will be filled with self-loathing, but know she is superior anyway!
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 03:45
|
|