Larian Studios Forums Divinity - Original Sin Divinity - Original Sin - Enhanced Edition High AP cost to move

Can someone tell me why warrior has such a high AP cost to move? It's like 5 AP to literally take two steps.

Checking high equipment, nothing is over his level and there is a total -0.1 movement.

I'm hoping I am just doing something wrong. The only way I can get him anywhere is with the ram skill. Ha.

Find an empty cup and an oil barrel. Fill the cup with oil. Combine it with your armor to reduce the movement penalty.

I actually didn't know that one, but I do know that at high blacksmithing you can simply put metal armor on an anvil for a bonus to movement, which can cancel out the penalty if there is one. Maybe its the same enhancement.

Is 0.1 really that impactful? I mentioned it not thinking it was much. Not exaggerating, he takes two steps.

I'll work on lowering it, but it didn't seem like much.

Oops, 1.0, not 0.1.... If it's that big a penalty I will definately lower it. ty

The thing about warriors is that they are, umm, well... not very good in the early game. Rogues may die ten times as often, but at the very least they don't rely on a single skill with a long cool-down to get from place to place.

Don't worry though. All you need is Blacksmiting 2-3 and you'll be able to boost your armor and get rid of the penalty. Another good idea is to either get Wildfire for your mages, as Haste increases movement, or splashing into Scoundrel with your warrior for Fast Track (cheap haste), Hoverfeet (for ignoring elemental fields and not having to walk around them) and Walk in Shadows (because lol). The added bonus of gaining access to the Pinpoint talent merely being icing on the cake.

1.0 is absolutely huge. I think that's your entire base move speed.

The base movement is 1.5 before any modification due to talents, spells and equipment. Most metal armour will reduce your movement by the stated amount in the description unless you modify the armour as posted above. Some magical armour will boost your movement but usually it is leather and has a dexterity requirement.

I've found plenty of plate armor that increases movement, and usually with blacksmithing skill you can add more +movement than the armor had -movement to begin with, but you can only do it to metal armor. Ultimately that means that leather users are shafted and plate is just the best. OFC you'll never get +dex or +spd on a plate armor.

Rogues really just suck. Anything they can do warriors do better, including high move speeds.

Well, that's definately the problem then, ha. I'll modify the armor pronto.

And idk, I'm liking my dual wielding rogue. I'm at level 11 and she's just ripping stuff up. I put some points into con so she has ok HP.

It's not about hp/defenses, though that's yet another thing warriors are better at. DW warriors just do flat out more damage without the need for backstab, and they have better attack skills besides.

If you think that's bad now, things will get even worse for the Rogue in D:OS 2, when the action point system is revamped so that all characters get 3-4 AP a turn, no matter what stats they have, and all actions take 1 AP (except maybe daggers will attack twice).

Why would they do that, just to dumb things down?

I'm really not finding that surprising at all. I've been finding the whole AP costs quite silly in Classic DOS myself. They essentially gave high available AP per turn for high cost skills, which is roughly the same as not-a-lot of AP per turn for a normalized 1AP cost leading to a specific number of actions per turn. When we think about it, that's exactly what XCOM:Enemy Unknown is doing right now ( 2012, of course ).

The main difference will be that over time, there won't be a reduction of the AP costs thanks to attributes/abilities/talents like there is now, which was making everything even more silly by the way and not very tactical. Heck, being able to chain 10 actions in a single turn was clearly making the game far, far FAR more easy than it should have been come endgame.

I have no idea why anyone would find the suggestion of reducing available AP and just giving a 1ap cost to everything is dumbing down anything. From "okay let's see, I have , huuh... ah! 18ap available, and I can ... 18-8... 10-5... okay, I can fireball here and move over there and... shit, I would have loved to launch a heal for 6 ap... let's find a closer place to go... here!" we will just go to "action 1, fireball, action 2 moving there, action 3, heal", end of story. Simpler doesn't always mean dumber.
Especially with up to 4 players making things a bit quicker will be an extremely welcome change.

Now, of course, I fully expect them to NOT give each and every weapon type a simple attack for 1ap. Of course that would be stupid and totally screw the damage-per-AP ratio. This is something being discussed on another topic and we should still not jump to silly conclusions as long as we have no idea what their plans actually are. They are game developpers, after all, that's still their job to figure things out and then ask us what we are thinking ( which they didn't with EE, resulting, imho, in a mixed bag of reactions ).
Making suggestions or debating how we view things is still perfectly okay though.

They're game developers, which means I have absolutely no faith in them to do anything BUT dumb things down. To think otherwise is naive at best. And simpler does equal "dumber". You could argue that it's sometimes an improvement, but it is what it is.

Anyway, there's a lot of depth to be found in managing your AP pool, both in the attributes that feed it and balancing skill uses of various costs. All of it is effectively being cut out if they change to a fixed pool. Maybe they can replace it with something else, but I'm not that optimistic.

Simpler is not equal to dumber.

You can imagine a complex set of rule where there is a clear and dumb OP strategy that trumps all. That is a complex set of rule that has no depth.

You can imagine a simple set of rule that has depth (like Chess), and complexify it with irrelevant set of rules that have ultimately no change on the gameplay. That is a complex (bloated) set of rules that adds no benefit to the simpler set of rules.

There are gags about this, for instance medieval men in a village explaining the rules of a game of cards during hours and hours with plenty of made up words.

I have noticed that too in the preview video. I still belive that they found it like shoot himself to the knee. Currernt combat system is one of the great things. there's a lot of depth, space for strategy. Make it simpler, dumb it down is good way for failure. There is a gold rule - If something works don't touch it.

For some reason it seems they think it is too much math add/sub numbers that could go into the teens. To be honest, I didn't really get their explanation of why the current AP system is so hard. IMO it gives you more room to balance all the skills between themselves having a wider AP pool.

Really, Xcom isn't "dumb" at all. The 1ap/1action is a very simple system that enables you to focus on what is important : moving around, placement, cover, actual actions... In short, tactics rather than endless mathematics. One could argue Xcom isn't even the same genre than DOS, but actually they are very close. Just replace shotguns with melee, assault rifles with bows, rocket launchers with fireballs, and you've got yourself a serious lookalike.
Or let's take a more extreme example, chess. Chess is essentially a tactical game with 1 action per turn for both players.

Involving more numbers and more maths isn't adding a layer of complexity or anything meaningful. simplifying the system isn't dumbing down. To think so is either elitist or precisely naive. I'll welcome a system where I don't have to involve numbers in the 50+ whenever I try to plan two or three turns ahead because it's just a useless annoyance as it is.

Again, the only thing that could make the whole plan fail is if they can't deliver a proper system that gives each type of weapon a specific ability or set of bonuses/maluses.
Other than that, they are developpers and developpers should always aim for the most simple form of gameplay that would still carry a lot of tactical / fun / challenging value. This is indeed their job and it absolutely doesn't mean they are dumbing down anything.

Of course, big numbers are painfull for human brain. Anything above 20 is not natural and need heavy training. However, current AP per turn is in this range perfectly fine. It is granular enough to enable play with. Make more raw, removes subtle play.

I would like to see reduced number of HP points for the same reason. 2689HP is hard to get for my brain. If something simple then divide by 10 all HP/damage related numbers .