|
enthusiast
|
OP
enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2020
|
What is the point in having a balanced party and skills when I can't see the future & know ahead of time to use <x> member for this dialogue or that skillcheck?
This becomes more egregious when playing with friends, as we now have to balance who runs ahead, who talks to ANY NPC, and who does literally anything at all, as it may be better suited for someone ELSE.
So please; Has the ability to just 'use the best skillcheck/party member' been added yet? You know; Using the Rogue for a Trickery check, even if the Druid is talking. Or using the Druid to talk to a Druid, even through the Paladin took 3 steps ahead and triggered a cutscene with Druids that none of us saw coming because it's our first playthrough.
Please, please, PLEASE at least make an option to let single-player tag out characters, and let multiplayer characters switch out with a vote.
|
|
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
|
Volunteer Moderator
Joined: Feb 2022
|
This is definitely a frequently requested feature, but I don’t think we’ve had any comment from Larian on it.
Personally, I’m single-player only but this would be so good for making my companions feel more alive and important, and I can see how it would be even more essential for multiplayer.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
OP
enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2020
|
This is definitely a frequently requested feature, but I don’t think we’ve had any comment from Larian on it.
Personally, I’m single-player only but this would be so good for making my companions feel more alive and important, and I can see how it would be even more essential for multiplayer. Yeah. I just wish they'd come out and say they're adding it. It's basically the one major thing holding the game back from being great, IMO, because I either have to: 1. Do skillchecks blind (And get frustrated when a party member could have done it better/feel bad when my co-op teammate could have done it better) Or 2. Read spoilers so I can know who to use when. I think that such a mode should be limited to whomever is in your active party (No getting bonuses from anyone back at camp), to encourage diverse builds. But as it stands right now; there's no point in having diverse builds because you're locked into whoever hits the event flag or talks to the NPC with a hidden quest first.
|
|
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
|
Volunteer Moderator
Joined: Feb 2022
|
There are, of course, different ways of letting the party be part of conversations, and there have been discussions about this on this forum before. Thinking of single-player, personally I’m not a fan of a solution that would automatically use the best skill check in the party and would like to have my low charisma fighter try to persuade if I want to. But I really, really would like to be able to swap to another party member and have them interject if I preferred that.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
OP
enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2020
|
There are, of course, different ways of letting the party be part of conversations, and there have been discussions about this on this forum before. Thinking of single-player, personally I’m not a fan of a solution that would automatically use the best skill check in the party and would like to have my low charisma fighter try to persuade if I want to. But I really, really would like to be able to swap to another party member and have them interject if I preferred that. Yes, it should 100% be an option that people can use or not use as they decide. I do agree with that.  That way people who want to 'tag out' with party members can, and people who want their party leader to make all the decisions and skillchecks ALSO can. 
|
|
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
|
Volunteer Moderator
Joined: Feb 2022
|
Yes, it should 100% be an option that people can use or not use as they decide. I do agree with that.  That way people who want to 'tag out' with party members can, and people who want their party leader to make all the decisions and skillchecks ALSO can.  Yep! Sounds like we’re on the same page here  .
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
old hand
Joined: Apr 2022
|
There are, of course, different ways of letting the party be part of conversations, and there have been discussions about this on this forum before. Thinking of single-player, personally I’m not a fan of a solution that would automatically use the best skill check in the party and would like to have my low charisma fighter try to persuade if I want to. But I really, really would like to be able to swap to another party member and have them interject if I preferred that. Absolutely in favor to not automatically use the best skill check. There are dialogue options which skill checks I want to intentionally fail in order to get additional and alternative dialogues and this possibilties should be kept.
Last edited by Lotus Noctus; 17/02/23 06:28 AM.
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2017
|
Some people don't like pop ups (I remember the discussion about reactions) but I would like a pop up (optional from the settings) before the dialog where in nice words (Shadowheart thinks you are too dumb to answer. The dialog is in need of a real hero, me, Wyll. or so) the companions offer their help and their stats are shown, then you can choose.
Sometimes (quite often) I also want to fail dialogs, so I would take the person with the least chances to succeed, as often there is sadly no "Attack Goblins." option in dialogs.
|
|
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
|
Volunteer Moderator
Joined: Feb 2022
|
Some people don't like pop ups (I remember the discussion about reactions) but I would like a pop up (optional from the settings) before the dialog where in nice words (Shadowheart thinks you are too dumb to answer. The dialog is in need of a real hero, me, Wyll. or so) the companions offer their help and their stats are shown, then you can choose. Personally, I think I’d prefer to have the ability to swap between my party members involved in the conversation at each point where there’s a choice and see the options they have to respond to the last thing the NPC said, and have one of them pick up the conversation instead. As well as being unobtrusive and not leading us by the hand, it feels as though this should be reasonably low cost as it would mainly reuse dialogue options that would need to be present anyway, in case those companions were the initiators of the conversation. There is a complexity for this option in determining which companions should be considered “involved in the conversation”, given I’d like to retain the option to swap to other characters not in the conversation and have them use NPC distraction to sneak and thieve. One option would be to use the chain system, and another would be to use proximity but have the option for an individual to drop out of the conversation while leaving the rest of the party in discussion. The latter might make more sense for multiplayer, but not having played multiplayer I’m sure there are many more things that would need to be ironed out to enable full party dialogue mode there.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
|
Yeah. I just wish they'd come out and say they're adding it. Eh. They either 1) won’t be adding it, so saying it straight will only upset people who hope for such feature 2) they will be adding it, which is better saved for 1.0 release to generate positive reception from people who want such feature.
|
|
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
|
Volunteer Moderator
Joined: Feb 2022
|
Yeah. I just wish they'd come out and say they're adding it. Eh. They either 1) won’t be adding it, so saying it straight will only upset people who hope for such feature 2) they will be adding it, which is better saved for 1.0 release to generate positive reception from people who want such feature. Personally, I’d prefer to know sooner rather than later if they’re not going to add this or any other commonly requested features. I’d be disappointed, but would have time to reconcile myself and would rather be disappointed before release rather than living in hope then being disappointed when the game comes out. And if improvements are planned, I’d rather know so I can stop thinking and talking about this issue for now. I’m fine to actually wait for the full release to get the feature, but am not going to feel any more positive about being surprised about it then than being told it’s coming now. In fact, if it’s coming and I’m not being told, I’ll be annoyed I had to worry about it for months longer than necessary! Of course, Larian might have this on their backlog but far enough down the priority order to be unsure if or how they’re going to implement a party dialogue feature, in which case I could understand their silence for now.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
OP
enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2020
|
Some people don't like pop ups (I remember the discussion about reactions) but I would like a pop up (optional from the settings) before the dialog where in nice words (Shadowheart thinks you are too dumb to answer. The dialog is in need of a real hero, me, Wyll. or so) the companions offer their help and their stats are shown, then you can choose.
Sometimes (quite often) I also want to fail dialogs, so I would take the person with the least chances to succeed, as often there is sadly no "Attack Goblins." option in dialogs. Honestly, the way I see it working is as follows: If there is dialogue options that are class or race dependent, the game shows (And I'm making up this dialogue but you get the point) "4. (Druid) (Character Name) I will not let you attack anymore beasts!" or "4. (Githyanki) (La'zeal) We will enter the creche! Move!" And if it's a skill check, then the boosts at the bottom (Where you can choose to cast Aid before rolling, if you have it) will also show who's best for the roll. You can click on them to make them roll, or just roll with whoever is doing the skillcheck. This way, you can see that there's an option for proper dialogue, or see that a party member has a better roll, but you can also ignore it if you want.
|
|
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
|
Volunteer Moderator
Joined: Feb 2022
|
Honestly, the way I see it working is as follows: If there is dialogue options that are class or race dependent, the game shows (And I'm making up this dialogue but you get the point) "4. (Druid) (Character Name) I will not let you attack anymore beasts!" or "4. (Githyanki) (La'zeal) We will enter the creche! Move!" Not sure I’m picturing what you mean here. This sounds like what we already have, except are you saying that we should be given all the class/background/race options for everyone in the party not just the person who originated the dialogue? I’d hope that protagonist dialogue options are given different flavours for origin characters and even potentially for Tav depending on how the story progresses, which could lead to this getting really messy if there were an option for every single different line anyone in the party could say at any point. And if it's a skill check, then the boosts at the bottom (Where you can choose to cast Aid before rolling, if you have it) will also show who's best for the roll. You can click on them to make them roll, or just roll with whoever is doing the skillcheck.
This way, you can see that there's an option for proper dialogue, or see that a party member has a better roll, but you can also ignore it if you want. Are you saying here that when there’s a skill check option that is common to dialogue that could be spoken by multiple characters, we are given a further option to pick who makes it on the dice roll screen? If so, I’m not sure about that as I would want the person who is saying the line to make the check, and to be able to pick the speaker before the line, as well as to choose who replies even for dialogue that’s not character-specific or doesn’t involve skill checks. It also feels a bit too much like hand-holding for my taste. I’d still prefer to be able to see what an NPC says then decide who would try to respond to it, select them, and see all the lines they could say. I feel I should know my party well enough to make a choice of who should respond to a specific point without having it all laid out in multiple-choice fashion, and the game does give us a reminder of how good the selected character is at particular checks if we hover over the check type. That’s for single player. Multi-player, I think each party member involved in the conversation should see what they personally could say in response to an NPC, but not exactly what their companions might say. There could then be different ways of handling who actually responds. It might just be a matter of who clicks first, which would rely on good manners or offline conventions to make sure that someone didn’t always hog the conversation by racing to select an option. Or perhaps the conversation stays with the current talker but the rest of the party have the option to indicate if they’d like to be tagged in and the current conversation controller would have the option to then hand over to them in a similar way to a single player selecting another party member. This would be done without knowing exactly what they might say or how good they might be at any checks involved, but this feels more true to TT than having everything laid out to everyone.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
OP
enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2020
|
Honestly, the way I see it working is as follows: If there is dialogue options that are class or race dependent, the game shows (And I'm making up this dialogue but you get the point) "4. (Druid) (Character Name) I will not let you attack anymore beasts!" or "4. (Githyanki) (La'zeal) We will enter the creche! Move!" Not sure I’m picturing what you mean here. This sounds like what we already have, except are you saying that we should be given all the class/background/race options for everyone in the party not just the person who originated the dialogue? I’d also hope that protagonist dialogue options are given different flavours for origin characters and even potentially for Tav depending on how the story progresses, which could lead to this getting really messy if there were an option for every single different line anyone in the party could say at any point. And if it's a skill check, then the boosts at the bottom (Where you can choose to cast Aid before rolling, if you have it) will also show who's best for the roll. You can click on them to make them roll, or just roll with whoever is doing the skillcheck.
This way, you can see that there's an option for proper dialogue, or see that a party member has a better roll, but you can also ignore it if you want. Are you saying here that when there’s a skill check option that is common to dialogue that could be spoken by multiple characters, we are given a further option to pick who makes it on the dice roll screen? If so, I’m not sure about that as I would want the person who is saying the line to make the check, and to be able to pick the speaker before the line, as well as to choose who replies even for dialogue that’s not character-specific or doesn’t involve skill checks. It also feels a bit too much like hand-holding for my taste. I’d still prefer to be able to see what an NPC says then decide who would try to respond to it, select them, and see all the lines they could say. I feel I should know my party well enough to make a choice of who should respond to a specific point without having it all laid out in multiple-choice fashion, and the game does give us a reminder of how good the selected character is at particular checks if we hover over the check type. That’s for single player. Multi-player, I think each party member involved in the conversation should see what they personally could say in response to an NPC, but not exactly what their companions might say. There could then be different ways of handling who actually responds. It might just be a matter of who clicks first, which would rely on good manners or offline conventions to make sure that someone didn’t always hog the conversation by racing to select an option. Or perhaps the conversation stays with the current talker but the rest of the party have the option to indicate if they’d like to be tagged in and the current conversation controller would have the option to then hand over to them in a similar way to a single player selecting another party member. This would be done without knowing exactly what they might say or how good they might be at any checks involved, but this feels more true to TT than having everything laid out to everyone. First question: Yes. If you have a Tiefling and a Druid in your party, and the Dialogue has options for a Tiefling or a Druid; It will show those options, along with the character's name. That way, people will know that it's a 'tag in' opinion instead of their current character. That way, they can ignore it if they don't want to use it. "Are you saying here that when there’s a skill check option that is common to dialogue that could be spoken by multiple characters, we are given a further option to pick who makes it on the dice roll screen? If so, I’m not sure about that as I would want the person who is saying the line to make the check, and to be able to pick the speaker before the line, as well as to choose who replies even for dialogue that’s not character-specific or doesn’t involve skill checks." I am saying that ANY skillcheck where one of your party members can do it better should have the option to let you pick said party member. You can decide not to use it if you want it to stay with your primary character. But other people could use it if they want. But again; Both ideas only work for people currently in the party. A player would not be able to take out Shadowheart for the Mage back at camp.
|
|
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
|
Volunteer Moderator
Joined: Feb 2022
|
I am saying that ANY skillcheck where one of your party members can do it better should have the option to let you pick said party member. You can decide not to use it if you want it to stay with your primary character. But other people could use it if they want. Hmm, well that’s not the way I’d prefer to do it as I see the skill checks as inherently linked to a specific character speaking a specific line rather than something that anyone can step in and roll. I want to be able to pick the character (from within my current close-by party) and what they say but NOT directly who rolls a check. As I said, there are lots of approaches possible here and it’s clear that different folk have different preferences. We’ll see how Larian square the circle, but hopefully they’ll at least do something as almost anything would be better than the current way we get locked into one character in dialogue.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
OP
enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2020
|
I am saying that ANY skillcheck where one of your party members can do it better should have the option to let you pick said party member. You can decide not to use it if you want it to stay with your primary character. But other people could use it if they want. Hmm, well that’s not the way I’d prefer to do it as I see the skill checks as inherently linked to a specific character speaking a specific line rather than something that anyone can step in and roll. I want to be able to pick the character (from within my current close-by party) and what they say but NOT directly who rolls a check. As I said, there are lots of approaches possible here and it’s clear that different folk have different preferences. We’ll see how Larian square the circle, but hopefully they’ll at least do something as almost anything would be better than the current way we get locked into one character in dialogue. I just think it should be an option. People can use it for dialogue or skillchecks or both or neither. No need to deny everyone something just because you don't want t use it. But yes; It's Larian's decision, and anything is indeed better than what we currently have.
|
|
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
|
Volunteer Moderator
Joined: Feb 2022
|
I just think it should be an option. People can use it for dialogue or skillchecks or both or neither. No need to deny everyone something just because you don't want t use it. It’s not about denying others something … I certainly have no such power  . But I think we should all be free to say how we personally would like the game to behave and, insofar as our suggestions of how to solve the problem of getting parties involved in dialogue are mutually exclusive, I still prefer mine and think that, on top of my preferred option of being able to swap in different characters to speak at any point, an additional option after selecting a dialogue option to then have anyone roll skill checks even when their companions are speaking would be confusing, messy and largely redundant. I’d prefer it didn’t clutter up any interface I saw and feel it would be inappropriate to add as a hidden toggle as I can’t really make sense of a game mechanic that has one character roll, eg, a persuasion check when another character is the one speaking. Just my view, of course, and everyone else is as free to disagree as Larian is to ignore my preference.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I know I've brought it up before, but this is reminding me of the encounter with the Gith if Lae'zel is in your party. I think she should be the one Kithrak Voss addresses, and I don't think someone should be able to sub in for her possible deception check.
But there are certain other checks have clear justifications for other characters to pop in and comment, Shadowheart and Gale in the catacombs for instance. In fact having characters interrupt your characters musings to comment on something is an underutilized way of giving our companions so more opportunities to be fleshed out.
|
|
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
|
Volunteer Moderator
Joined: Feb 2022
|
I know I've brought it up before, but this is reminding me of the encounter with the Gith if Lae'zel is in your party. I think she should be the one Kithrak Voss addresses, and I don't think someone should be able to sub in for her possible deception check.
But there are certain other checks have clear justifications for other characters to pop in and comment, Shadowheart and Gale in the catacombs for instance. In fact having characters interrupt your characters musings to comment on something is an underutilized way of giving our companions so more opportunities to be fleshed out. Yes, I agree that for certain conversations or checks the character speaking and doing checks should be locked in, or at least should involve some special option to accomplish and explain a hand off, primarily when an NPC is very definitely interacting with a specific party member rather than the party as a whole. This does complicate things a little, but shouldn’t affect too many different encounters so hopefully should be manageable. And I’d definitely agree that there are far too few occasions when our companions interject in conversation or as we wander the world, and it’s annoying that when more than one companion has something to say they seem to override each other so we only hear from one. Having a companion interject might also sometimes be used as a prompt to single players to consider tagging them in for dialogue if that were an option.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
|
|
|
|
|