CottonWolf posted:

I strongly appreciate the Vela shout out in that update. Everyone should steal the orlan baby.

AriadneThread posted:

Vermain posted:

I assume that sub-classes are like what you got in BGII, where you could be a Druid with a werewolf shapeshift and special powers or whatever. They'd take the basic conceit of the class and give it some unique features in exchange for weakening some of its core abilities.

Janissary Hop posted:

It's not just that, as discussed in the last page less than half the people who played PoE got out of the first act, which takes like, two hours to do tops. The combat in vanilla PoE, which is mostly low level and mid low level, is unredeemable trash full of copy pasted mobs you beat by tanking and spanking. The addition of scripts exposed the problem even more as now you don't even have to be awake to use your one or two per encounter abilities when you aren't just auto attacking. I didn't finish vanilla POE when it came out because the combat was so awful and I would not have played White March if I hadn't gotten it already for pledging so much into the kickstarter campaign and then heard it was actually really good.


I don't think you're "getting" the problem with starting at level 1.

AriadneThread posted:

we'll put her on the prow of the boat

Comstar posted:

Did PoE ever open up? I played multiple times to almost or just past the first city, but it seemed very liner to me, unlike BG1 and 2.

Also I hated the priest NPC, and I'd hit a wall at some point and the whole party would die multiple times and I'd restart later and hit a wall somewhere else.

I suspect I'm a bad player of the game, but I could never build a wall to stop monsters leaking through to hit the missile guys in the back line ansd my guys would get stuck in combat and not be able to hit the enemy back line.

That being said, I've backed this again - I hope the character creation has more call backs in the game - I liked the idea of being a Pirate who got chased out by his crew and had to go find a new home, but the game never really asked about it after the tutorial area.

Chairchucker posted:

Since they're (maybe?) redesigning classes the change I hope for is to not have mages and priests (was there anyone else? I don't remember) be limited casts per rest. That's the main reason I dropped Durance and Aloth, I couldn't be bothered with characters who needed to rest to be useful when everyone else was still ready to go.

Lt. Danger posted:

Per-rest is bad because it's meaningless. It's like one of those incremental "clicker" games - click the spells to make baddies die, then click the rest button to refresh the spells, repeat for 60+ hours. Who wants that?

D&D had per-rest, but D&D also (originally) had extensive time-keeping - active or wandering monsters, calendar events, rival adventuring parties etc. A hard-failure time limit is an acceptable substitute.

Better yet, Wizards/Priests/Druids could probably do with a bit of a redesign anyway. They feel very similar in how they play, and the Grimoire mechanic just never really went anywhere.

Lt. Danger posted:

gently caress off. I'm talking about the basic way in which their spells function, not their gimmicks - all three are Vancian casters with the same (weak) spell rationing gameplay. By contrast Chanters, Ciphers and Monks are all mana casters with very different ways of generating mana.

Grimoires could do with unique bonuses, as suggested earlier, and greatly reduced capacity so I can't just load one up with all the good spells and leave it be. Maybe then I'd have to actually manage my Wizard's spells and swap between books once in a while.

Tomorrows Ace posted:

could someone explain why Torment 1 is so widely revered? I was way too young to understand it when I played it and never got past Sigil.

The writing seems really 90s — a lot of edgy teen nihilism vibes. The art direction is reaaly bad and the combat sucks.

I know it has interesting narrative and roleplaying choices (the whole [Truth]/[Lie] options) and weirdo tim burton characters but it never made me want to go back and try playing it. I do remember reading and enjoying the novelisation though so what the hell do i know?

And doesn't it also have that hilarious and cringy description for prostitutes someone dug up in the last thread?

Power Bottom posted:

So basically the same problem that Multiclass/Dual Class had in BGII. Got it.

Rookersh posted:

On the multiclassing thing from the stream.

I have no idea which game it was, but I played at least one DnD based video game that did it 2nd Edition? style where you just say "I'm a Fighter/Druid now" and both leveled at about the same rate, but slower then if you had been leveling a Fighter or a Druid. I swear it was a 3rd Edition game, but I can't remember which one it was. It might have been a completely different system.

As a person who doesn't know every single class obsessively, and who had never played TT that was awesome for me. I was able to say "I want to be a dude what hits things but also casts spells." and the game supported that without any additional work from me.

Meanwhile every time I go back to Baldurs Gate I want to play a F/M of some sort because I don't like any of the wizard companions in either games. But I have no idea when is the best time to make those jumps because I just fundamentally don't understand how DnD works at such a level. Switch at level 3 instead of 4 and suddenly I lose out on two whole attacks in late game, or I miss out on x spell, or I miss out on x thing I can never get back ever. Go 4 Fighter and 6 Wizard instead of the superior 5 Fighter/5 Wizard because I don't know the behind the scenes numbers and suddenly I'll forever be down 100 health from where I could have been. It's a balancing act of what you want from each class, and I don't know each class well enough to know what I actually want from each outside of "Fightin'" and "Spells".

So I just never do that. I could get out a notebook and write it all out, but that's too much work for a game. I could use a guide, but that's too much work for a game. At a point I usually just shrug and play straight Fighter again.

So personally I would prefer a system that just has you level both simultaneously at the cost of xyz things ( far lower xp gain, might not get as many skills, can't subclass, whatever the downside should be. ). It's more simplistic, but also easier to get into.

On the other hand, I totally recognize why most people don't agree with me and would instead prefer greater control over when they switch to the other class to get the maximum benefit from both classes.

Maybe having some sort of "basic" toggle would be good? Where you design for the 3rd Edition rules, but you can also just admit you don't know/don't care to know and click a slider box, and the game will just swap your class at the ideal levels as determined by the devs?

CottonWolf posted:

Dual classing remains a loving weird system. Magical class amnesia.

AfricanBootyShine posted:

We're getting it, it just has the potential to be a lovely compromise. It's just a 'same thing but WITH MORE FEELING' button doesn't have quite the same feeling as say, popping your single-cast high level spell you've been saving for the right moment, and watching as the ice shards rain down on your enemy.

I'm open to it, I'll see how it plays. I trust ropekid, but some of the other stuff people are throwing out here sounds straight unfun/boring.

I mean, I understand Dragon Age is popular but I've always felt it was the Assassin's Creed of RTwP RPGs: a high budget mediocre game for mediocre people.

oswald ownenstein posted:

This is a thread about a nerd game on a nerd forum so you should really lay off the pedestal - or sucking up to Josh or whatever it is that you're trying to do

Not everyone is going to be thrilled about a ton of pretty huge changes to something they thought was good and only wanted some iteration on

I'm personally glad to see some others that are having their excitement downgraded. I was definitely in the poe1 + improvements camp and not the 'radically change tons of things trying to fix everything at once that was wrong with PoE1' camp

AfricanBootyShine posted:

why are you guys taking it so seriously

Basic Chunnel posted:

A good way to cut down on the nomenclature is to just add "mind" as a prefix to all cipher combinations. Mind fighter, mind paladin, etc

$3 million stretch goal needs to be raising money to get rope kid a goiter and a lot of chocolate and rich foods so we can complete his metamorphosis into George Lucas

Octo1 posted:

Is it really necessary to allow for every combination? Why not just go with the ones that would have interesting synergy? No matter what you do, there will probably be character concepts that wouldn't work well in the current system. A cipher/wizard for example seems like it would have a hard time unless the cipher gains focus from wizard spell damage.

Basic Chunnel posted:

I don't think restricting combinations would go over well, with veterans or newcomers. Even if it's not as inexplicably arbitrary as 2e racial restrictions.

oswald ownenstein posted:

I think I you're just safer with 2e style 'pick at creation' - that way you can skip clunky resourcing

I noticed that was trailing #2 on your poll but it's easier to balance and present to player

Trebuchet King posted:

Argh, thanks. Guess I'm hosed, then.

Trebuchet King posted:

I got the impression tempering was exactly that...just factoring in perspective to preservation.

Kurtofan posted:

What would barbarian ciphers be called?

Tony Montana posted:

I thought about it more and the only reason I think his assumption and actions around the hollowborn are stupid are because I'm comparing it to my current worldview in which people being killed for 'faith' is ridiculous. My characters worldview would not be like mine, because I can throw a fireball with my hands and my loving head is actually constantly on fire and all the other crazy poo poo in a magical world.

Maybe Raedric is actually closer to solving than anyone else, perhaps killing the hollowborn is actually the right thing to do. If it's some magic crazy that's going on then why do I automatically assume the best way to deal with it is logic and evidence.

Man, this is a good game.

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

The Dozens feel most apropos for a carryover to the next game. After all, they killed a god once already: they're the experts.

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

There's no need to pay attention to that, I'm going by alternative facts on this one

Rookersh posted:

Can we get an update on how the end of PoE will change the nature of the Priest class?

In PoE1 the Priest start was a sensible choice. You were a Priest of Berath coming to the Dyrwood to serve the community. You were a slave that was very devoted to Magran and in turn they granted you powers to help others. You were a swashbuckling pirate that turned to Ondra for luck/sealife and she helped you in turn with tricks. You were a devotee of Eothas that still believed in the goodness of your deity and wanted to help others in the Dyrwood to prove Eothas was still something they should accept.

But with the reveal at the end of PoE, what is the Priest class going to be in 2? Having the class still fervently believe in their gods feels like it'd be a bit silly. Who is granting you your powers if you are standing against all the gods? Are you just choosing to work with the gods as a matter of convenience? Trying to gain power from them? What is a -Priest- in the confines of PoE2, knowing what we know.

Or is the truth of the Priest class that your powers were never given by the gods, but instead by you using the power of your own soul to help others, and you've got a particularly strong soul now.

Tony Montana posted:

No consoles! NO CONSOLES!

Remember Elder Scrolls! Remember how everyone still loves Morrowind! Remember the trash Oblivion and Skyrim became, mostly because they changed to address the console market!

Console fags have their final fantasy and Mario and whatever else stupid poo poo. RPGs are for PC gamers, just like RTS and true FPS are!

gently caress the revolution of dumb!

Tony Montana posted:

Wikipedia says they were both released middle of 2002. Are you smarter than Wikipedia? You should go update that page then.

What was real complexity? Tell me your super hardcore oldschool RPG. Most of the people here will know Baulders Gate and Heroes of Might and Magic. Planescape:Torment gets a lot of love and one of the primary influence for Pillars.

What is your jam?

Airfoil posted:

Kooky hyperbole, yes, but he has a point. Making a game for console requires UI design which almost never turns out well for those of us who prefer mouse and keyboard. Not to say it's impossible to design something that works well with both controller and KB/M, but it isn't done often.

Tony Montana posted:

No, not at all. You're missing my point. Your second paragraph is the problem. If you don't think design decisions driven by console adoption made those games worse (such as dropping the detailed UIs perfect for displaying inventories, etc) then we do not agree on video games. Which is ok lol.

I know Morrowind was 'dumbed down' but I'm just trying to give an example of a modern RPG that didn't hold the console version as the almighty gospel. If the PC and console versions were developed in tandem then hats off to making the PC version really PC. Later versions of Elder Scrolls lacked exactly this (until we just put it all right again with mods, but that's hard work and took a while!)

Airfoil posted:

I dunno about that. The Skyrim inventory is a 5-star example of how not to design for PC.

Tony Montana posted:

No, I don't think it's as mysterious as all that. You can pull the 'well different situations means different things so generalizing is always bad' but the only people that use that are people that don't have enough life experience to know you can and should draw conclusions.

The complexity comment is entirely your opinion. It does have intrinsic value. It's not the only marker of a good game, in isolation perhaps not enough on its own.. but complexity does have intrinsic value. Observe the absence of it and tell me otherwise.

Complexity just means work, it means content. Maybe it's bad and dumb, but it's there. The alternative is nothing is there, so you're done and you're bored.


That's good. In Skyrim and Oblivion some poor PC dude had to write SkyUI or whatever it was so we can actually play the game.


It's not like this is controversial

bongwizzard posted:

I would suggest that it's impossible to make a "good" story while leaving any room for player agency.

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

I like the idea of the ng+ system but I don't wanna be an undead vessel, that's weird

I mean I liked pirates of the carribbean too but that's a big character choice and what if my dude was in the "gently caress Berath" camp