Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: Jan 2014
L
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
L
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by Fastel

While most of the suggestions don't make it any more complicated to distribute stat points and skill points they do nerf the OP builds making the game at least have a little challenge which it is currently lacking.

If I am level 3 I shouldn't be able to fight 20 level 4 NPCs and win by myself with the current system I could which is ridiculous and that is all down to the way they laid out the stats and skill abilities.


The argument quoted is pretty silly. Why do people insist on making arguments like these?

Originally Posted by Avilyss
It's important to remember that these discussion are why there is an Alpha to begin with. Agree or disagree with the posited arguments, these discussions give everyone (including the developers) a chance to think about the topic at hand and see multiple view points.

All of us are here because we want this game to be great. We may have differing opinions on exactly how to make that happen but that's why we're here talking about it. Let's try not to dig our heels in too deep.


Everyone has entrenched positions more or less based on the language being used here and no one is interested in actually discussing actual mechanics.

Quote

Personally, I'm on the side of the discussion that the attributes could use a little more "identity." Each attribute should offer something to a build (no matter the build) so that choosing which attribute(s) to increase becomes an important decision.

We can't compare it to D&D honestly because D&D accomplishes this by having a "skill" system with the skills being modified by the attribute (such as climb and swim being affected by strength while balance is dexterity), which this game does not have.

Instead, I would suggest finding a way to have each attribute contribute something to a build, something like:


What is 'identity'?

If all attributes contribute to any given build does it necessarily follow that selecting which attribute to increase becomes an important decision?

Does it matter that the D&D (depending on which edition) has a rigid progression and class system, which can contain exceptions to the core rule set(s), when examining the relationship between attributes and the system as a whole or other components of the system? Or does having skills weigh more heavily?

Quote

Now, I'm not suggesting these are the best ideas nor am I stating that they should be done exactly like this but...the idea is to make every attribute contribute in some way to any build or character so a player can choose to strengthen their character in a variety of ways based on the attribute(s) they choose to increase.

Strength based characters can still benefit from intelligence because it modifies magical armor (thus increasing their immunity to magical control) and it will affect the duration of their own control abilities (like knockdown).

Intelligence based characters can benefit from Wits because if their magical armor is depleted, it will reduce the duration of silence and other effects on them, Constitution to enjoy this same resistance to physical effects, etc.

Just a thought.


How about just adding more abilities that can accomplish what you just outlined? Just a thought.

Joined: Jul 2014
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Jul 2014
To address your questions:

No, I suppose it doesn't necessarily follow that the decision becomes more important if the attributes all contribute in some way. I suppose it merely adds a level of diversity to builds that may-or-may-not be practiced by the playerbase.

D&D employs a multi-faceted system by which feats, skills, attributes and spells all intermingle to various degrees both in and out of combat. What I was pointing out is that one of the primary motivators for attribute distribution in a game like D&D is how those attributes affect other areas of the game, skills being the example I chose to use. It is simply one way in which D&D makes each attribute have some benefit to a character regardless of what class they are or what their "primary" attribute(s) are. I then followed this up by stating that attempting to accomplish something similar is one idea that could be toyed with but since the game doesn't have "skills" in the sense that D&D does, it could be done a different way and then provided a possible way to do so.

Some ideas of abilities to add that would accomplish the same general principle would be welcomed. It's certainly an alternate and viable approach.

Thanks for the feedback.

Last edited by Avilyss; 14/10/16 06:20 PM.
Joined: Jan 2014
L
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
L
Joined: Jan 2014
For D&D the strength and its weakness is the class system, attributes are second class citizens; in order to cover multiple play styles multiclassing was the solution and then attribute considerations came next.

Skills aren't that good of an example to bring up because of the bad exchange rate between attributes and skills (again depending on what edition you're in) and the quantity of ranks per level. Also, the relationship between skills + attributes vs levels is kind of inverted. So, the overall effect of attributes on skills is fairly small depending on which stage of the game - I do not think this is what you want. I

In DSO2, abilities are first class citizen as they have the largest impact in the game and they are what defines your play style based on what you pick. If that's the case then it makes more sense to achieve diversity of builds through abilities rather than attributes keeping it as internally consistent while minimizing side effects.

Joined: Sep 2016
Kresky Offline OP
member
OP Offline
member
Joined: Sep 2016
I'm curious if spell crafting will fill in the blanks for a larger variety of abilities.

I'll use an example to explain what I mean:

Blitz Attack (Strength) + Shocking Touch (Intelligence) = Thunder Jump (Intelligence)

You take the core identity of one strength/intelligence/finesse-based skill and essentially give it the attribute modifier (strength/intelligence/finesse) of another.


Last edited by Kresky; 14/10/16 09:50 PM.
Joined: Jul 2014
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Jul 2014
Originally Posted by Limz
For D&D the strength and its weakness is the class system, attributes are second class citizens; in order to cover multiple play styles multiclassing was the solution and then attribute considerations came next.

Skills aren't that good of an example to bring up because of the bad exchange rate between attributes and skills (again depending on what edition you're in) and the quantity of ranks per level. Also, the relationship between skills + attributes vs levels is kind of inverted. So, the overall effect of attributes on skills is fairly small depending on which stage of the game - I do not think this is what you want. I

In DSO2, abilities are first class citizen as they have the largest impact in the game and they are what defines your play style based on what you pick. If that's the case then it makes more sense to achieve diversity of builds through abilities rather than attributes keeping it as internally consistent while minimizing side effects.


This is a fair assessment, thank you.

Joined: Sep 2016
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Sep 2016
Oooh, I like where this discussion is heading.
Someone mentioned having static, or mostly static attributes. While I support this decision in principle. I think it does leave something out of the idea that "today a wizard, tomorrow a battlemage".
But if stats were more meaningful (and weren't all over every piece of equipment) than even getting 1 stat every few levels could work. The key is 'could work' I think we can all agree from playing all the forms of RPGs over our gaming careers that a lot of different systems 'could work'.

So would it be a fair direction to instead discuss what the goals of a system that works would be?

I propose:
1. That the system provides an avenue for a wide range of effective builds. (this is the biggest draw of the original sin series and it's most unique aspect when compared to similar games. You have no restrictions, class or otherwise. Many of the stat systems mentioned in this thread for comparison exist in rpgs with more rigidly defined roles)
2. That the system makes apparent sense and is intuitive. (strength for the strong, con for those who take many hits etc.)
3. That the system is fun to use. (this also covers progression and level-up, for instance: a static system takes some of the fun out of leveling up and developing your character, you make less choices and you cannot change your decision after the fact.)

I think the current system:
1. Moderate success. I think as awkward as it is, the current system allows a wide range of effective builds. I finished a play through with a battlemage (war/pyro/geo) who wore a staff and slaughtered lots of bad guys. My stats were also a nightmare (I purposefully just threw this and that there) and it was still a relatively easy clear. However, the current system also has too many dump stats and conversely: ideal stats. Limz might have more to say about this as he'd tried more builds.
2. This is where the biggest failing is. One, because it confused most players and even many critics and two, because all some of them do is tweak one maybe two numbers right now, and not very convincingly.
3. I think this is also something that could be improved currently. I mentioned earlier that I barely cared about stats unless it was memory. And I made a completely effective character by putting every single point into finesse and using only 3-4 skills the entire play through.

Joined: Sep 2016
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Sep 2016
From above:
If I had to make a suggestion; I would start where many have already done in this thread: adding to the number of things tied to each stat.
Str: Move speed in armor is the biggest thing (reduce the penalties and take that ability away from crafting). A larger accuracy bonus for str. based weapons. I don't propose high stat req's for armor or stat req's on weapons. As that limits instead of adds to our options.
Fin: Climb rate/distance travelled (small increment increases). reduce chance to slip on ice/slowed by oil. (not when hit, but when walking over). Small acc. increase to all weapons.
Int: Nothing
Con: Something. (maybe this is the best place for more restrictive armor requirements. You'll need so much Con to equip this heavy breastplate or resist this cursed ring)
Wits: (I don't like wits)
Memory: Change the scaling to make 1 point matter.

Then I would implement something like a sigmoid or S curve to the scaling (for clarity, this is referred to as a 'soft cap' - except I would recommend a soft soft cap). This was one thing I absolutely loved in the first D:OS. That the more invested you were in one area, the more points it cost to improve that area. Except don't change the costs, instead change the rewards. Maybe this is already in game, because at level 20 or so, more finesse only added a 2.0% increase. So if at that point one point in Str adds the large swings we see at character creation then this would be a point in favor of stat diversification. As partner to this, I would change the stat by level and stat by item balance currently in game to more of a 50/50 split. (with optimizer players potentially achieving 50/60 respectively by sitting on shop keepers)

I think by that point I would be happy.

Joined: Jan 2014
L
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
L
Joined: Jan 2014
The annoying thing really about the attribute system in this game and, in say D&D, is that there are almost always inflection points; for example, you only need X amount of Memory for Act 1 and need Y amount of Wit to ensure that with +3 Leadership you will always go before most of the mobs. Then the rest goes into Strength/Int/Finesse (your primary attr).

Because of Larian's decision, and other designers, attaching non-uniform bonuses to attributes then factoring in the other systems you end up having those inflection points. There is always a danger that adding more things to attributes ends up creating a more toxic atmosphere while doing the opposite will lead to more stability but at the cost of diversity and meaningfulness (why even have attributes at a certain point). For example, removing the relationship between attributes and accuracy would allow for more potent hybrid builds in terms of damage (and also it would make finesse stronger since you would have less sources of accuracy).

I would be happy if they took another look over accuracy and gave some D&D 4e-esque abilities that cross scaled between attributes/weapons and diversified the 'skill' trees to include both magic/physical damage abilities.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by Fastel
That's just lazy on your part and most people that play RPG's a lot don't do that no offense but torchlight is by far one of the easiest stat based rpgs in creation. In case you haven't noticed the more complicated and RPG is in terms of character creation the more people tend to play it. Most people thought Planescape torment was terrible when it was released because they didn't understand it. Now it is considered one of the greatest video games ever created.


Call me lazy if you want, I don't care, but for me, there are cases of games which put in too many stats. Without it being very clear which stats would be better, it doesn't help make decisions. The more stats you have to consider, the more difficult decisions become.

Honestly I only finished Torchlight once and that was years ago. It was too boring and the kind of item fever which is supposed to drive those kind of ARPGs never clicked for me.

Also while yes Planescape: Torment is still highly praised for its world and story - the combat, not so much.



Originally Posted by ImariKurumi

Personally, I'm on the side of the discussion that the attributes could use a little more "identity." Each attribute should offer something to a build (no matter the build) so that choosing which attribute(s) to increase becomes an important decision.

We can't compare it to D&D honestly because D&D accomplishes this by having a "skill" system with the skills being modified by the attribute (such as climb and swim being affected by strength while balance is dexterity), which this game does not have.

Instead, I would suggest finding a way to have each attribute contribute something to a build, something like:


My issue with that approach is simply that at the moment, you get only two attribute points per level. That is only enough to focus on two or three attributes anyway regardless of how many are useful.

Quote

Strength:
- Increases damage and accuracy with strength-based weaponry
- Reduces movement penalty for medium and heavy armors, allows the use of heavier armor
- Increases carrying capacity (weight)
- Reduces the AP cost for climbing during combat (contributes to the new height system)
- Affects Warfare skills

Finesse:
- Increases damage and accuracy with finesse-based weaponry
- Increases dodge chance
- Increases movement speed (move further per AP point)
- Affects accuracy and damage when dual-wielding (penalties for low Finesse while dual-wielding)
- Affects Scoundrel and Marksman skills

Intelligence:
- Increases damage and accuracy with intelligence-based weaponry
- Increases duration of status effects and control
- Provides bonus to Magic Armor (instead of Wits)
- Affects all magical school skills

Constitution:
- Modifies total Vitality
- Reduces duration of physical status effects and control on character
- Increases healing received

Memory:
- Modifies total number of abilities a character can have memorized and the power of skills that can be learned

Wits:
- Affects initiative, critical chance and detection (traps, hidden objects, stealthed enemies)
- Reduces duration of magical status effects and control on character


Still though, that looks like a pretty reasonable distribution of useful bonuses to different attributes.


Quote
Strength based characters can still benefit from intelligence because it modifies magical armor (thus increasing their immunity to magical control) and it will affect the duration of their own control abilities (like knockdown).


I'm having a hard time seeing how the balance for that would work. Would it be some kind of extremely steep diminishing returns, so a handful of INT points gets you a lot of bonus magical armor, but a truckload doesn't give you all that much more?

If it's linear, then either the bonus to STR characters from INT would be minimal, or the bonus to INT characters would be huge. There are other issues along those lines as well.


Joined: Oct 2016
Location: Germany
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2016
Location: Germany
Originally Posted by Surrealialis
Except don't change the costs, instead change the rewards. Maybe this is already in game, because at level 20 or so, more finesse only added a 2.0% increase. So if at that point one point in Str adds the large swings we see at character creation then this would be a point in favor of stat diversification.


No, it isn't. Those numbers count for ever point above 10. (except Const and Memory)

Also the benefit for each point ist down to 2% per point already at level 8. You started with 15% at level 1 for the three base stats, wits starts with 2.5 per point and goes down to 0.3 per point at level 8. Meaning at level 8 you need about 8 Skill points for the same effect you got at level 1 for 1 point. Seems to be a linear devaluation.

Joined: Sep 2016
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by Stabbey
Call me lazy if you want, I don't care, but for me, there are cases of games which put in too many stats. Without it being very clear which stats would be better, it doesn't help make decisions. The more stats you have to consider, the more difficult decisions become.

Honestly I only finished Torchlight once and that was years ago. It was too boring and the kind of item fever which is supposed to drive those kind of ARPGs never clicked for me.

Also while yes Planescape: Torment is still highly praised for its world and story - the combat, not so much.


Planescape torment was ground breaking I never said the combat was good lol it was more than the story it was about feeling like your character was achieving something for any stat increase. Your character came alive because you were forced to make choices which affected them in game leading to ability increases and you had to find the right people to change class's not just purchase skills from some bum with a book.

That being said:

This thread has become very active hopefully the devs are seeing that and noticing that they need to do something about how character advancement works before release of the game and change the way attributes work.

I'm not asking for Hero system level revamp here if anyone gets that reference good on you its the most complicated PnP roleplaying system out there and you actually have to use a computer program to create characters or it would take you days for creation and advancement.

I would be happy with a change back to the DOS skill and attribute system when you can learn anything at level 1 skill points that is crazy and the attribute mechanic is totally broken right now and the system used in DOS to determine how many and what skills to raise being limited by points and having the cost of points spent per level of skill be cumulative prevented most OP builds that could destroy game balance it also made the game more fun.

While the suggestions in this thread are good I am also thinking of the easiest way to keep the game fun without making the devs work to hard on any kind of revamp to the system.

Joined: Oct 2016
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2016
IMO the primary stats as it stands are terrible from a design standpoint. They don't actually provide much of any choice or customization in their current state. What do I mean by this? Well, if I want to be a potent caster, I need int to be pumped every level. If I want to be a melee fighter, well then strength is my jam, and so on, and so on. With the way that your power gets stripped away from you if you stop putting points into a stat, you can really only afford to be flexible with 1 or 2 stat points ever few levels. Because of this, every choice the player makes isn't really a choice. There is the right way and every other way is the wrong way. As it stands the game would literally be better off if stats didn't exist and only skill specialization mattered. (think Elder Scrolls)

They really need to find a way to separate from skills being associated with stats if they was to keep the backwards scaling effects of the primary stats. (which I honestly hope they don't)


Chaotic neutral, not chaotic stupid.
Joined: Sep 2016
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by Limz
[quote=Fastel]
While most of the suggestions don't make it any more complicated to distribute stat points and skill points they do nerf the OP builds making the game at least have a little challenge which it is currently lacking.

If I am level 3 I shouldn't be able to fight 20 level 4 NPCs and win by myself with the current system I could which is ridiculous and that is all down to the way they laid out the stats and skill abilities.


Originally Posted by Limz
The argument quoted is pretty silly. Why do people insist on making arguments like these?


How is this argument silly? I could do it with the elf/melee build because I can keep killing and killing and killing with no draw backs. Even with half the build I killed the cooks cadre at level 1 as a perfect example they are all level 3 and there are 6 of them. This was on classic mode by the way which is as hard as it gets right now.

Last edited by Fastel; 15/10/16 10:58 PM.
Joined: Sep 2016
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Sep 2016
The linear devaluation by level is an odd problem. But it's because of their damage increase/level mechanic. The idea being, if you just leveled up and never put in any stat points. You'd do the same damage as you did at level one. Larian has confirmed that that was their intent. This makes it seem like you HAVE to invest every stat point.

They have already confirmed that they are looking into it.




Joined: Sep 2016
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by Surrealialis
The linear devaluation by level is an odd problem.


The more is said about the system, the more it sounds like it really should do away with adding stat points every level.

There's no real mechanical difference between being forced to add points to improve, and just having the character improve automatically based on their initial stats(again, S.P.E.C.I.A.L. in Fallout 1/2), but with static stats, the value of a point grows with level, rather than diminish, so it feels a lot better when you do get the opportunity to increase one of them.

Joined: Sep 2016
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Sep 2016
While I feel like a static system would be an improvement I don't feel like it is the ideal solution because1, it requires knowledge of the system before making a character. I need to know what stats my char will need before I get a chance to make then. 2, I cannot change or develop with my character. Because advancement and class design is so fluid, it would be unfortunate if I decided my mage wanted to develop his finesse and use some sneak attacks but I would never get the stat spread to make that effective because I didn't plan for it at start. 3, it would take some of the enjoyment and excitement away from leveling and remove an avenue of progression.

Some of this could be mitigated by having a standard point spread or pseudo/randomized character stats. But I feel many would dislike those decisions being taken out of their hands.

Last edited by Surrealialis; 17/10/16 01:13 PM.
Joined: Jul 2014
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Jul 2014
I think trivializing the ability points is the wrong direction. I think the idea is rather to make the ability points feel more prominent and important. A slight increase the effectiveness of a single point at the cost of reducing how many points you get would accomplish a lot more toward getting them where I'd like to see them.


Joined: Sep 2016
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Sep 2016
Making points feel more prominent and important doesn't have to mean less points. The main concerns are the penalties to hybridization, the lack of depth and the relative 'meh' that comes from tieing only minuscule % buffs to stats. What we want is something that is fun, intuitive and allows for a wide variety of customization.
I don't see how slightly increasing the numbers associated to a stat point makes any difference in these concerns or goals without further in depth changes. Unless you were already factoring in those changes.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by Avilyss
I think trivializing the ability points is the wrong direction. I think the idea is rather to make the ability points feel more prominent and important. A slight increase the effectiveness of a single point at the cost of reducing how many points you get would accomplish a lot more toward getting them where I'd like to see them.


We only get two points now, and apparently they are not very effective, so a "slight" increase would not help much even before you reduce the number of points.

In D:OS 1, all attributes started at the base of 5, and you got 0.5 attribute points per level.

In D:OS 2, all attributes start at the base of 10. That's already cutting the relative power of them from D:OS 1 in half. The 2 attribute points per level is roughly equivalent to getting 1 D:OS 1 point per level. That's only a slight increase in attribute value per level compared to D:OS 1.

In any event, even leaving the amount of points you get per level at 2 seems to be low considering that you have primary, secondary, AND Memory attributes to consider.

Joined: Sep 2016
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by Surrealialis
I feel many would dislike those decisions being taken out of their hands.


There is no decision being taken out of the player's hands though.
It's just being front-loaded to the beginning of the game.
Realistically, none of the flaws you mention really apply.

-You need a basic understanding of the game mechanics when creating your characters anyway, and everything you need is explained at creation to the extent necessary.

-Course correction is actually easier, because it's only a matter of finding the right gear, rather than taking numerous levels to boost a previously neglected stat to match the rest(and the point is largely moot anyway, since the game will likely provide the ability to reset the character build at some point).

-It takes no enjoyment out of leveling at all, since a vast majority of the interesting decisions in that regard is made not in the stats tab, but in the talents one. On the contrary, by making a stat gain more scarce and more meaningful, it actually boosts the satisfaction from gaining a point.

Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4

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