Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Joined: Mar 2013
S
veteran
Offline
veteran
S
Joined: Mar 2013
The good option should always be the toughest one in my opinion.

Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Västervik
S
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
S
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Västervik
Originally Posted by Cylion
All I want is something like this: A) Kills 3 NPC's gets 100x3=300xp. B) Don't kill one NPC but talk your way out = 300xp. C) Talk your way out = 300xp, kill the 3 NPC's after = 0xp


That makes much better sense, sorry if I misunderstood your intentions.
I would however like there to be some different outcomes both in social effect and in XP. If you get 300XP whatever way you interact with a group of NPCs it suddenly erases part of the meaning in how you chose to interact with them.
300XP should be a reward for the most sucessfull social inteaction with them, and then if you fail you can still get the full amount by killing them but that has both the risk of draging other people into the fight, and the negative effect of losing acess to an NPC that might have some other quest in the future, or who might simlpy be a decent vendor.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by Skallewag
Originally Posted by Cylion
All I want is something like this: A) Kills 3 NPC's gets 100x3=300xp. B) Don't kill one NPC but talk your way out = 300xp. C) Talk your way out = 300xp, kill the 3 NPC's after = 0xp


That makes much better sense, sorry if I misunderstood your intentions.
I would however like there to be some different outcomes both in social effect and in XP. If you get 300XP whatever way you interact with a group of NPCs it suddenly erases part of the meaning in how you chose to interact with them.
300XP should be a reward for the most sucessfull social inteaction with them, and then if you fail you can still get the full amount by killing them but that has both the risk of draging other people into the fight, and the negative effect of losing acess to an NPC that might have some other quest in the future, or who might simlpy be a decent vendor.


Generally speaking, I believe that "Talk your way out" is used much more often for NPC's likely to usually be hostile, not vendors or quest-givers.

You're probably not going to find a lot of those usually-hostile encounters in the middle of a crowd of vendors or quest-givers. You seem to be suggesting that Larian deliberately move some vendors and quest-givers away from their usual spots into range of a potential fight just for the increased chance of punishing the player.

That seems to be a deliberately malicious approach to quest design which I don't think I agree with.

Choosing to fight versus not fight already has some different outcomes. Choosing to fight can grant you additional rewards in the form of items on the bodies, but at the potential risk of losing resources (Potions, arrows, grenades, resurrection scrolls). Winning a challenge saves you the fight, but you lose out on the loot.

And really the biggest concern that Cylion and others have is not "getting equal experience" for both combat and talking, but being able to exploit the system and get DOUBLE experience by talking an encounter out of fighting, then starting a fight deliberately and getting kill experience as well.

Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
Originally Posted by Cylion

All I want is something like this: A) Kills 3 NPC's gets 100x3=300xp. B) Don't kill one NPC but talk your way out = 300xp. C) Talk your way out = 300xp, kill the 3 NPC's after = 0xp


Friend kills two NPC's from extreme range using stealth, last NPC questions me about it, then resets. Then, I talk my way out of it. 2x100xp + 1x300xp = 500xp.

Joined: Sep 2016
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Sep 2016
I don't think this is a problem.
If Larian made the little quests you can do for people slightly more rewarding in EXP a 'good' helpful character could get enough XP to equal or beat characters who kill people willy nilly. And so both the willy nilly murderer and the quest giver will progress well, more loot for murderer, more quests for the good guy.

If somebody wants to go through the work of re-uniting two people, or completing a jerks quest and then attacks them. They SHOULD get more exp and the rest of us shouldn't care.
In addition, if somebody wants to trade with a guy, then stab him in the stomach and take all of his inventory. He should be able to do that and the rest of us shouldn't care.
It's a single player RPG game, and some roles that people will play should not be punished for being a power hungry loot grabbing maniac.

In short, the ONLY change to experience granted should be a small increase to errands and side quests to allow for a 'good' character to meet a higher xp milestone than someone who ignores quests and kills people.

BUT the guy who does the quests and kills the person afterwards should not be penalized. It's a valid character choice that is not power gaming or system abuse. Villians will often work with someone, maybe even 'help' them in some way to gain trust before taking what they want. Why should our PCs be any different.

Joined: Sep 2016
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by SlamPow
Originally Posted by Cylion

All I want is something like this: A) Kills 3 NPC's gets 100x3=300xp. B) Don't kill one NPC but talk your way out = 300xp. C) Talk your way out = 300xp, kill the 3 NPC's after = 0xp


Friend kills two NPC's from extreme range using stealth, last NPC questions me about it, then resets. Then, I talk my way out of it. 2x100xp + 1x300xp = 500xp.


This would be perfectly okay if,
Each kill gave 75XP and the talking your way out of it was 300XP.
Guy who gives no shits kills all three. Gets 225 XP
Guy who thinks, maybe there is a way out of this and works for it gets 300XP.
Guy who thinks, I'm suave enough to talk my way out of this, succeeds and gets 300XP, then decides he likes the one of the guys bling and kills them for it. 525XP.

Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
Originally Posted by Surrealialis


This would be perfectly okay if,
Each kill gave 75XP and the talking your way out of it was 300XP.
Guy who gives no shits kills all three. Gets 225 XP
Guy who thinks, maybe there is a way out of this and works for it gets 300XP.
Guy who thinks, I'm suave enough to talk my way out of this, succeeds and gets 300XP, then decides he likes the one of the guys bling and kills them for it. 525XP.


Your solution does not solve the problem at hand. I noticed in your other post that you dismissed it, but I feel that the issue does hurt immersion, as a "right" way of playing is emphasized. After all, if there is literally no downside to killing everyone afterwards, then you are just hurting yourself by not doing it. It's like having a really overpowered thing in the game; sure, you could just not do it, but what of your friends? Especially other players in public groups.

Additionally, what if you want to compare experiences? If you did not perform well because you ignored the optimal route, then it's your fault. The player is directly to blame for not using all the resources available. And if you did perform optimally, despite intentionally hindering yourself, then that's that. But people do struggle with the game, including my friends, and as such are motivated to do the most prudent thing: kill all of the silent monks, slaughter the civilians, and prune the merchants we don't need anymore. Not everyone is a murder hobo, and not everyone wants to play that way. And in a group where everyone has free will, all it takes is one guy to mess it up for everyone.


Tl;dr does not solve the problem, which hurts immersion and detracts from the experience as a whole.

Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Västervik
S
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
S
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Västervik
I hope for a mod that goes all meta on the game, adding a "game master" as an NPC in the game. By interacting with him in different ways he could manipulate stuff like what amount of XP stuff is worth.
You could perhaps threaten him to increase certain types of XP, but if you fail at your intimidation he punishes you instead. And if you kill him nothing is worth XP or drops loot anymore (sine you killed the GM).
Then you would haveto go on a long annoying quest to resurect the GM again. smile

Joined: Sep 2016
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by SlamPow


Additionally, what if you want to compare experiences? If you did not perform well because you ignored the optimal route, then it's your fault. The player is directly to blame for not using all the resources available. And if you did perform optimally, despite intentionally hindering yourself, then that's that. But people do struggle with the game, including my friends, and as such are motivated to do the most prudent thing: kill all of the silent monks, slaughter the civilians, and prune the merchants we don't need anymore. Not everyone is a murder hobo, and not everyone wants to play that way. And in a group where everyone has free will, all it takes is one guy to mess it up for everyone.

Tl;dr does not solve the problem, which hurts immersion and detracts from the experience as a whole.


No, it doesn't detract from the experience. There is no plot armor in this game and it's a great thing!
If the player's goal is to 'play optimally' and his assessment of playing optimally is murdering, killing, pillaging and robbing to get more 'stuff' then good on him.
If playing optimally means to ROLE PLAY a character that kills/does not kill/robs/does not rob. Then play that way.
If a group member decides he wants to kill things you don't want to kill. GUESS WHAT!? you get to role play, and maybe you let your friend kill the guy and that's YOUR FAULT. If keeping the guy alive is what your character would do, then kill your friend, in game. Fight each other. That is what makes a REALLY good game.
And if it offends you that people who play this game, can use dirty tricks and back stab digital people to get ahead and 'play optimally'. You need to look for heaven somewhere else. Because that's how life is, it's how it works. If you want to make a 'good guy' play through more rewarding. Ask for stronger village people, more people around and more outrage when people just start dying around you... mysteriously...
Because that's the REAL way to go about preventing the needless slaughter of innocent campers.

I sincerely want to have the option to gain additional experience by taking the time, and often, going out of my way in game, to find ways to get it. Whether that be by selling everything I own to someone for their money and then stealing it all back or by helping reunite a daughter and monster/father and then deciding I would learn more if I dissected the monster/father.

Last edited by Surrealialis; 07/10/16 03:49 PM.
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
Originally Posted by Surrealialis

And if it offends you that people who play this game, can use dirty tricks and back stab digital people to get ahead and 'play optimally'. You need to look for heaven somewhere else.


Whoa man, chill. I never said I was offended. I said that it detracts from the experience, and you have yet to form a convincing argument otherwise.

Either way, the caps are not necessary, and neither is the condescending attitude. Your way of playing is not necessarily what other people want. Most people don't want to fight their friend, and combat like that is not supported in the game right now anyways. If I am anywhere nearby when he starts a fight, I get dragged in. There is no way around this.

Joined: Sep 2016
T
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
T
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by Surrealialis


And if it offends you that people who play this game, can use dirty tricks and back stab digital people to get ahead and 'play optimally'. You need to look for heaven somewhere else. Because that's how life is, it's how it works. If you want to make a 'good guy' play through more rewarding. Ask for stronger village people, more people around and more outrage when people just start dying around you... mysteriously...
Because that's the REAL way to go about preventing the needless slaughter of innocent campers.


Sorry man but your life sucks.

@norD hello, we are asking you for a stronger village people! And I want them to be enraged when people just start dying around me...mysteriously.
Can we actually have the skill to make people die around the character mysteriously? And some village people would be nice.
"Village People" concept art.

Last edited by Testad; 07/10/16 04:29 PM.
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
Originally Posted by Testad
some village people would be nice.
"Village People" concept art.


Yes! I fully support this! An ingame fictional nation named Merr'Ka, where everyone from the natives to the guards knows how to party! grin

Joined: Sep 2016
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Sep 2016
Ahh the sensitivity.
I'm allowed to be scathing if you're allowed to read two well written posts with arguments in the contrary to your opinion and gloss over them and say 'I'm not convinced'
And your justifications are:
-I feel that the issue does hurt immersion, as a "right" way of playing is emphasized.
-It's like having a really overpowered thing in the game; sure, you could just not do it, but what of your friends?--But people do struggle with the game, including my friends, and as such are motivated to do the most prudent thing:

So basically, you're justification for being a criminal is that it's easier. And you can get ahead faster? Hey guys! Welcome to world politics/ global trade/ world history 101. Glad you joined us here for lessons. Remember slavery? Or following fascist orders? Or the TTP? (well, that last one might not be history yet)

But let's rewind from life education here. This is a game, where you can play a villain as easily and convincingly as a hero. If we compare to ANY fictional setting worth it's salt, LOTR, Harry Potter, the Forgotten Realms, Marvel, DC. It's a universal theme, being good is hard, being a hero and defending the weak is REALLY hard. Being a villain? Taking a shortcut to get ahead in the short? Not so hard. Often we identify with antihero's, those trying to do good but flawed, making mistakes, faster to anger (and prudent!).

So please Larian, do not take away the ability to play the game evil and more importantly don't cheapen my choice to be a hero. If being a hero is a choice you made for me, because there was no advantage to being evil, even in the short term, than being a hero in your game doesn't matter, I'm just a cookie cutter delivery mechanism for your story. But if every time I hear "Not in the mood for cheese" I have to make the choice to play a better character, then that choice means something.

Last edited by Surrealialis; 07/10/16 05:09 PM. Reason: Crusading
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
Originally Posted by Surrealialis
Ahh the sensitivity.
I'm allowed to be scathing if you're allowed to read two well written posts with arguments in the contrary to your opinion and gloss over them and say 'I'm not convinced'


Alright. I wouldn't have used the word "Scathing", as it gives a little too much credit to what comes across as garish capslock and vulgar condescension. Allow me to address your argument.

Originally Posted by Surrealialis

No, it doesn't detract from the experience.


You're wrong.

See? An opinion does not constitute an argument. You literally just said the opposite of what I said, all in opinionated format. Except, you didn't state them as opinions. You stated them as truths. Thus, somehow, you made a post in which I could definitively say that your opinion is "wrong", because it was stated factually.

Originally Posted by Surrealialis
So basically, you're justification for being a criminal is that it's easier


Hmmm, you're going to have to show me where I said or implied anything like that, because I just don't see it. The citation you allude to clearly states that it creates a power differential in playstyles - not that it's easier. Please read more thoroughly next time.

Originally Posted by Surrealialis
So basically, you're justification for being a criminal is that it's easier. And you can get ahead faster? Hey guys! Welcome to world politics/ global trade/ world history 101.


Hmmm, putting words into my mouth, I see.

Originally Posted by Surrealialis
So please Larian,


Aaaah, skipping the discussion and just talking straight to the developer. I guess this is no longer a discussion thread? Since we're just talking to Larian?

Originally Posted by Surrealialis
Lot's of people struggle with life, go to any inner city neighborhood, watch good people struggle and do 'the most prudent thing' to make it easier. Recognizing this does not make 'life suck'. This is called recognizing the need for laws, equity and social assistance. This is called working as a doctor in aforementioned locations and then coming back to small wealthy neighborhood privilege and recognizing it's existence. The opposite could be called ignorance.


Aaaaaand you're off topic. In a bad way, too! So you've

Taken up part of your post with moral grandstanding

Presented your opinion as fact

Used caps lock as a rhetorical tool

Condescended quite consistently

Misrepresented my stance on the issue

Belittled me for what you believed to be opinion

At this point, it's safe to assume that you're either a really bad forum troll, or too young mentally to play this game. Either way, I'm not going to bother addressing any more of what you say, because you're not worth anyone's time.

Have a great day! grin

Last edited by SlamPow; 07/10/16 05:20 PM.
Joined: Aug 2015
Location: Quebec, Canada
N
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
N
Joined: Aug 2015
Location: Quebec, Canada
Originally Posted by Testad

@norD hello, we are asking you for a stronger village people! And I want them to be enraged when people just start dying around me...mysteriously.
Can we actually have the skill to make people die around the character mysteriously? And some village people would be nice.
"Village People" concept art.

It seems that tagging people doesn't work on the forum.
I almost missed that!
On a side note though, I'm creating levels and environments, I don't place NPCs :P

Joined: Sep 2016
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Sep 2016
Thanks for the troll and completely missing the point Slampow - you've done this in multiple threads now, so it's only right I talk down and belittle you. Can't handle it? Get a life.

I'll just put these two side by side for intelligent readers.

Originally Posted by SlamPow
If you did not perform well because you ignored the optimal route, then it's your fault. The player is directly to blame for not using all the resources available. And if you did perform optimally, despite intentionally hindering yourself, then that's that. But people do struggle with the game, including my friends, and as such are motivated to do the most prudent thing: kill all of the silent monks, slaughter the civilians, and prune the merchants we don't need anymore. Not everyone is a murder hobo, and not everyone wants to play that way. And in a group where everyone has free will, all it takes is one guy to mess it up for everyone.


Originally Posted by Surrealialis
So basically, you're justification for being a criminal is that it's easier


Originally Posted by Surrealialis
But let's rewind from life education here. This is a game, where you can play a villain as easily and convincingly as a hero. If we compare to ANY fictional setting worth it's salt, LOTR, Harry Potter, the Forgotten Realms, Marvel, DC. It's a universal theme, being good is hard, being a hero and defending the weak is REALLY hard. Being a villain? Taking a shortcut to get ahead in the short? Not so hard.


Maybe now you can go back to being toxic in the 'elfs in skirts' forum posts again.



Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2016
Location: Texas
Originally Posted by Surrealialis
Can't handle it? Get a life.


Ouch, I almost cut myself on that edge.

Hmm, you should read what you quote, by the way. Might save yourself some embarrassment.

Joined: May 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: May 2013
The troll with the marzipan is asking for a stop in personal attacks. I'll just let that sink in.


Way I see the situation is that experience should be given for anything one does, proportional to effort put in. So crafting should give a modicum of exp, and so should murder. So yes, choices one makes about what path they take in the game should result in different rewards, just not wildly different from each other, so that no one choice becomes the one choice that overshadows the others. Unless we're going for real-world realism. But this fantasy game is not, last I checked.
Not saying it must be implemented this way, just saying what currently makes most sense to me.

Now, if we're talking about personal experiences, I do kill the silent monks, but I usually do so to anything hostile that does not want to talk. In games. I also murder the whole Griff kitchen on basis of their being what they are. "Innocents" are left alive.
The result of that is that I do not end up underpowered. In fact, by how much exp it takes to go up in levels, it's hardly much of a difference.


Unless otherwise specified, just an opinion or simple curiosity.
Joined: Jul 2014
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Jul 2014
In my limited experience, walking the path of the "good guy" is usually more difficult in some ways and easier in others.

For example, the "good" guy is usually more socially acceptable and therefore tends to interact with NPCs (or PCs in a multiplayer RP setting) easier. He'll often be more welcome in social gatherings and is more likely to have loyal friends who will stand beside him when the going gets tough.

Conversely, the "evil" guy is more likely to have run-ins with the general populace, less likely to have people willing to help when his back is against the wall and generally can't trust his "friends," because they're probably "evil" too and will likely do whatever gives them the greatest edge rather than risk their necks for him.

The "good" guy is usually going to "gear up" slower because he's not going to take the immoral, amoral or simply unscrupulous shortcuts necessary to obtain the gear quicker. Murdering the guy that won't sell him the super-sword isn't an option. Stealing usually isn't an option for the "good" guy because it's generally not considered the moral high ground. Instead, he has to earn his gear through quests, the generosity of others or purchasing it at the listed price (with some haggling, of course!)

The "evil" guy, on the other hand, is generally going to "gear up" quicker. Murder is perfectly acceptable. Stealing? Definitely in this guy's playbook. Backstabbing employees who hold out on you? Just good business.

Taking the moral high ground has its advantages and its disadvantages just as walking the darkened path does. In the end, I've found the game experience is generally equal for both sides.

Is there a lower experience point gain for the "good" path? Maybe a little but not enough that I've ever felt underpowered or incapable of completing the game, there are plenty of alternative ways to earn experience points that don't involve my character compromising his moral compass.

Could I level up faster if I played the quest out and then murdered everyone? Absolutely! Would I enjoy the game as much? Probably not because I enjoy immersion and that would completely shatter it.

Last edited by Xerynth; 08/10/16 01:41 AM.
Joined: Sep 2016
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Sep 2016
Honestly, the complaints here are more than a little silly:

Lets take some basic logic to the problem and break things down: (assuming highest difficulty)
- XP for effort
- As you level, the amount of XP needed to level up grows
- Each encounter/quest is geared for a certain level range in the game as there's no level scaling
- Killing requires effort and, at times, resources
- Two players are allowed to play competitively in the same game (ie report one for killing to the guards)
- Stealing = time & effort = rewards -> money/loot
- Fights = time & effort = rewards -> xp/loot
- Time/exploration = effort = rewards
- Optimal builds will always be op by end game for the most part
- Just as in D:OS there's a specific amount of xp possible in game
- Due to how level up xp scales, average number of players will be at level X by end game
- Due to how level up xp scales, hardcore players will be at X+1/2 by end game
- Due to how level up xp scales, players that know every possible trick for extra xp will be X+3 by end game
- Optimal builds at level X will have mild challenge end game depending on on non-optimal tactics
- Optimal builds at level X+1/2 will have little to no challenge end game depending on non-optimal tactics
- Optimal builds at level X+3 will laugh at end game enemies no matter what
- To reach level X takes average player time Y
- To reach level X+1/2 takes hardcore player time Y * 1.5
- To reach level X+3 takes dedicated perfectionist (ie me) time Y*2

Assuming Y >= 60 hours on tactician, are you really gonna say you begrudge someone who spent 60+ extra more hours, on a single play through, than you, a couple levels and better loot?

Cause that's what you're complaining about here: that someone who knows everything about the game for xp exploit spends many extra hours hunting down all those exploits and that he shouldn't be rewarded for all that work cause it's "evil"

....well, bloody hell, being evil is a crap ton of work, ya know? Gotta know every quest and NPC, gotta work through all the fights, and gotta know everything about everything so you don't accidentally mess up a quest. What are you? Some kind of elitist?

Don't be hatin' the evil hobo barbarian! Do you not see how much he has to work out to keep that body in shape for slaughtering? And, man, cleaning up the blood! It rusts weapons, ya know? And then he has to hunt the runners. And on and on.

Ya'll make it seem easy, but a "good" play through basically just means taking a paved highway to the end with a couple bumps here and there. Going evil is the equivalent of stopping, getting out the car, and slowly walking the whole damn way while taking note of everything. Of course, the ride is damn smoother. We see the bumps a mile ahead of us and can just walk around while we take our time

EDIT:
Does someone being "good" need the validation that they're as strong as the guy swinging the sword all day? Even when they don't need the extra muscle for any task given? Is the fact that they experienced a different play through not enough?

Last edited by aj0413; 08/10/16 07:33 AM.
Page 3 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Moderated by  gbnf, Kurnster, Monodon, Stephen_Larian 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5