Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: Nov 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by EstherEloise
Originally Posted by Tzelanit
Getting the feeling that Larian is going to start adopting shady DLC practices and they'll be saving level cap increases for paid expansions, ultimately ending at level 20 after 2 or 3 of those cash grabs.

DLCs are not cash grabs, though, and I wouldn't mind that.


I fully agree with you but that is as long as they've got most of the bugs worked out of the game and the ability for mods as well

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by Tzelanit
Getting the feeling that Larian is going to start adopting shady DLC practices and they'll be saving level cap increases for paid expansions, ultimately ending at level 20 after 2 or 3 of those cash grabs.
What is so shady about DLC? O_o
I mean ... if there is enough content, story, races, classes, spells or simmilar stuff ... i would happily payd for ti, so no shady business.
And if there is not ... i would simply not buy it, so once aggain no shady business at all.

True, it may seem sometimes like some developers created open story just to sell DLC with closure afterwards to complete it, but i dont think that is common rule.


I liked original spellcasting system more ... frown

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: Dec 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Dec 2020
level caps are for a reason so like, if its 10 then 10 is the CR of the endgame, if the cap is increased that'd mean like, rewriting the whole end section to be harder/higher level? Like I get so far we only have the prologue to play with but presemable they've already done plenty work on the end and the rest, with lvl 10 in mind for it?

Originally Posted by Tzelanit
Getting the feeling that Larian is going to start adopting shady DLC practices and they'll be saving level cap increases for paid expansions, ultimately ending at level 20 after 2 or 3 of those cash grabs.

like bg2 did... ?
If an expansion/DLC increases lvl cap then its increasing stakes and encounters CR too so you need it no?

Joined: Nov 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Nov 2020
Solasta's max level will also be 10. mainly because the devs say a lvl20 game would make the story far longer...

Why are game devs so lazy nowadays?

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by AceVentura
Solasta's max level will also be 10. mainly because the devs say a lvl20 game would make the story far longer...

Why are game devs so lazy nowadays?

Maybe they will add more lvl later with DLC?


I don't speak english well, but I try my best. Ty
Joined: Jan 2021
Location: Netherlands
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2021
Location: Netherlands
It is silly to call people lazy for them to focus on a more managable level range. I rather have them focus on this and expand on it later, if needed. (BG1 also had a level cap, with BG2 moving on from that). Quality over quantity.

A level cap rather than rushing to the max level just means a more detailed story and content as well as the possibility of an expansion that continues with the characters from the initial game.

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
I think BG and D&D's basic concept of experience and levelling has become pretty antiquated in the era of computer and video games, since it really doesn't fit that well with the kind of granular expectations of char progression adopted and bequeathed to us by most other non-D&D cRPGs. You know, where hitting lvl 50 there is on par with hitting lvl10 in D&D, and the player is being constantly rewarded with level ups.

In D&D the near exponential levelling curve is supposed to be supplemented by other intermediate forms of character progress, like gear progression, or spellbook progression, or party/follower progression. So the player can remain engaged with a sense of "progress," even when there's no chance of hitting the next level anytime soon. Or better yet, where the story and character reveals are so engaging, that you don't even care if its not giving you xp or gold, because the story is just that good lol

One of the issues with D&D is that rewards and reward scaling are left largely up to the DM's discretion, so how quickly a character is meant to grow (growth along whatever dimension) is pretty divergent and largely up to the gamemaster.

I think a starter campaign that jumps you from lvl1 to beyond lvl10 is probably a pretty poorly designed low level campaign. It means that the DM couldn't find more creative ways to scale their player characters' sense of progress and had to resort to treasure or xp overloads for the hurry up.

Then again many people gripe about D&D being painfully boring at lower levels, and that has been going on forever. So not too surprising that people aren't satisfied with the idea of a game capping at say lvl4 or even lvl10, because it doesn't feel like that's going to be enough room to make the thing fun. I see that as more a problem in how they've crafted their treasure/gear/story progression to fit D&D's draconian and rather dusty levelling scheme.

The sweet spot for this one should probably be the same as BG1, basically where you hit lvl 7-9 at the tail end (2e had separate XP tables by class but lvl9 still a good cut off point). That way the follow up campaign can take you from lvl 10-16. After which point you are into epic level territory, where everything has to scale up for demigod type characters to even make sense in the traditional D&D scheme.

A good low level D&D campaign is a unique challenge, where the trick is to make it seem novel, even though its been done a hundred times before and kind of ubiquitous by now.

A good epic high level campaign, weirdly has to address similar problems at the other end of the spectrum. Just subsituting "kill the rats" with "kill the dragon," but still a similar challenge not to have it feel all tired and played out.

Mid-level D&D campaigns are the sweet spot. Simpler and more adaptive for a whole host of reasons that tend to make them more memorable. Though I think they work much better in a serial or modular format, rather than in a massive connected campaign. BG is one of the few games to pull off a connected campaign for all those tiers in a way that felt largely satisfying for at least most of the ride. I'm not sure it can really be replicated without just being rebooted. Its hard to know where they want to go with it. If this is going to be a Saga game with an obvious expansion/sequel, or if the Tav vs tadpole campaign ends in some other way.

The gold boxes and BG and Neverwinter teased an overarching concept of serial/modular continuing adventures, where the Character was independent of any specific Game... but then failed to deliver on it long term. Instead we got a bunch of reduxed game engines and sequels which, for lack of a better word, didn't have backwards compatability. Then they just abandoned the idea altogether to pursue MMOs. And of course in those we need 100 lvls, because that's just how those games work I guess hehe.

I wish Wizards could find a way to commit to like a 10 year plan and multiple games for the Realms under one roof. To actually bring Faerun to the computer in a serial way. One that is integrated with their PnP products for a more timely release... You know, so we could just have one edition of the rules at once, instead of these games always coming out on the cusp of a transition from one edition to the next or .5 of whatever. Instead of doing stand alone big ticket entries with different developers, or MMO pay to play models, to do an actual continuing series for the single player/small party. I'd like that.

NWN tried for it, but then they had to up and change studios and lost all momentum. Ditching backwards engine compatibility, balkanizing the content creating community they had just set up, and stalling out so we could have a NWN2 that was better looking at the time but harder to use, and sort of defeating the initial purpose. You can't really do a serial presentation without some fairly serious comittment to continuity.

I don't know why, but its like they couldn't figure out that D&D would obviously make a better show than a movie. So instead of a Game of Thrones on HBO that holds the world in its iron grip for half a decade, we end up getting some quick trash cash in like...


Summon Trailer is hella deadly magic, not to be used by low level mages without exercising extreme caution.

Last edited by Black_Elk; 19/01/21 07:59 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Honestly level 10, 11 or 12 or something is perfectly fine. The characters are very powerful and you don't end up with stupidly overpowered and ridiculous scenarios, and they don't have to implement spells like Wish, which doesn't really work in a computer game right now anyway.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
I wonder why is this topic so long? O_o

OP asked for something ...
First reaction corected him that was allready promised ...
Everyone happy!
What is happening after? And why is it happening? laugh


I liked original spellcasting system more ... frown

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: Nov 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
I wonder why is this topic so long? O_o

OP asked for something ...
First reaction corected him that was allready promised ...
Everyone happy!
What is happening after? And why is it happening? laugh

People started discussing the ramifications of what we were promised and what it could mean, essentially a discussion of the broader topic of what the level cap might be/should be. And what it could mean for how the game could turn out.

Joined: Jan 2021
F
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
F
Joined: Jan 2021
I agree, I think lvl 14 is most likely where they should put the level cap. A lot of classes get some of their core abilities at that level, and it would also prevent Larion from having to add 8th level spells to the game, since lvl 14 spell casters can still only cast up to 7th level spells. While it's possible they will cap it at 12 just to avoid adding 7th lvl spells to the game, I think that would be too low for a level cap given how much experience we are already receiving in Act 1 alone. As mentioned above, we probably could have reached lvl 6 in Act 1 alone if there wasn't the EA lvl cap in place. It would be more fun to continue leveling as we play, and get to use some of the 14th lvl class abilities, rather than just be stuck at lvl 12 for 20 or 30 hours worth of content at the end of the game.

Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
I actually prefer lower levels. The 5e ruleset is pretty solid to about around level 11-12 and then it gets pretty wild.

Level 11 is a good spot to end since it’s a hallmark level for all classes. Perhaps one more level so players can play with their new abilities for one more level. But I’d prefer the game be somewhat grounded.

Joined: Jan 2021
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by Ferros
As mentioned above, we probably could have reached lvl 6 in Act 1 alone if there wasn't the EA lvl cap in place. It would be more fun to continue leveling as we play, and get to use some of the 14th lvl class abilities, rather than just be stuck at lvl 12 for 20 or 30 hours worth of content at the end of the game.
XP rates are always adjustable and it may very well be the case that the act 1 xp gain was overtuned so we don't need to explore every nook and cranny to try lvl4 stuff out, leaving more stuff for the casual testers to find at the full release. At least I purposefully avoided certain things so I would have fresh content on release even in act 1 but maybe that's just me.

Also I'm fairly certain you only end up spending hours at the level cap if you absolutely minmax and game the xp system the whole way through ie. pass speech checks for xp, do quests for xp, then kill the npc anyway. That's pretty much what you had to do to be capped out well before the end in original sin 2, along with completing every quest your character could progress.

Another way they could go about the issue of grinding act 1 especially is the classic fallout method of inevitable game over if you dont get the worm out of your head fast enough. Doubles as a limit on how many long rests you can take! Now I doubt a modern game would ever do this but it's fun to think about, I would certainly enjoy the actual urgency of the mission. Lae'zel approves.

Page 2 of 2 1 2

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