13 réponses à ce sujet

[ReturningExile]

It appears that the inactive characters are not receiving any experience. This is a major concern because the higher the level of my main character, the larger the gap between them becomes and makes the inactive characters pretty much useless. Is anyone else experiencing this or is this intended?

[Si-Cwan]

I would think that its supposed to be that way.... this isn't KoTOR, or NwN... I think it makes the game that much more real.. think about it.. if your sitting at camp while your friends are out fighting... are you going to gain anything from thier fights?

[JironGhrad]

they gain XP very slowly while sitting in camp

[ZootCadillac]

That's exactly how it is supposed to be. You need to change your party regularly to suit your current missions and gain them experience.

It may only be a game and it may not be AD&D based but to expect non-participating characters to gain XP from sitting in camp is just not what RPG playing has ever been about.

[NewYears1978]

I always thought Bioware said you aren't forced to use the camp party members to keep them from lagging behind...guess not?

[ThreeHeadCerber]

they definitely have the same amount of exp as active members

[Si-Cwan]

hums.. i just noticed that they they all have different levels.. but they all are about the same.. even people i've never used are around lvl 14 +/- 1 or 2 levels....



intresting... tho i can't say that i "like" the idea but its still good to know its there!

[RealPoseidon]

Let's say you keep A, B, C for playing always. D, E and F you keep always in camp. If at some point you take D, E or F at a mission they'll be automatically 1 level below you e.g. if you're 20 they'll be in the beginning of 19.

At least that is how it is for me.

[Tychonar]

Party members in your party pool (inactive permanent members) are supposed to gain xp while not in your active party. We did not want your followers to fall behind in levels, that way you can use them in late game.



Can you specify the names of the characters that don't appear to be gaining xp.

[krabman]

ZootCadillac wrote...

That's exactly how it is supposed to be. You need to change your party regularly to suit your current missions and gain them experience.
It may only be a game and it may not be AD&D based but to expect non-participating characters to gain XP from sitting in camp is just not what RPG playing has ever been about.

What RPGs are about is having fun. Not keeping them leveled up gives you only two options, constant swaps to keep the group up or leaving them behind as they become too far back in lvl to be of any value. Neither of those options is attractive to me and I would bet many players would agree with that sentiment. This is a no brainer to my inner game designer, keeping them leveled in town hurts nothing while opening up options to those that want them. 

[ZootCadillac]

RealPoseidon wrote...

Let's say you keep A, B, C for playing always. D, E and F you keep always in camp. If at some point you take D, E or F at a mission they'll be automatically 1 level below you e.g. if you're 20 they'll be in the beginning of 19.
At least that is how it is for me.

Yeah I've just notice this, party members are levelling up as soon as I take them on a mission and i've not used them in a while. Whis is pretty crap because i've been rotating my team to keep the xp up and it's made some parts of this quite difficult.
You really should not get xp for inactive members.

[Beskar7]

Your characters are always one level below your main. Everytime you got to your party select screen, it updates the characters to this.

Modifié par Beskar7, 10 novembre 2009 - 11:14 .

[ZootCadillac]

krabman wrote...


What RPGs are about is having fun. Not keeping them leveled up gives you only two options, constant swaps to keep the group up or leaving them behind as they become too far back in lvl to be of any value. Neither of those options is attractive to me and I would bet many players would agree with that sentiment. This is a no brainer to my inner game designer, keeping them leveled in town hurts nothing while opening up options to those that want them. 

So it's only fun if it's made easy?

I'll have to disagree and it's not something I'm used to being a D&D player since the 70's.

[krabman]

ZootCadillac wrote...

krabman wrote...


What RPGs are about is having fun. Not keeping them leveled up gives you only two options, constant swaps to keep the group up or leaving them behind as they become too far back in lvl to be of any value. Neither of those options is attractive to me and I would bet many players would agree with that sentiment. This is a no brainer to my inner game designer, keeping them leveled in town hurts nothing while opening up options to those that want them. 

So it's only fun if it's made easy?

I'll have to disagree and it's not something I'm used to being a D&D player since the 70's.

No one said anything about making it easier. I said its about having fun. If it wasnt fun it would be work and they would be paying us to play. I have been gaming since the term referred to pool or pinball and no matter what or when the bottom line is and always has been having fun. Were I calling the shots during game development the game would have this on a toggle and in no case would it auto assign skills and stats. Regardless most gamers I know like the option of being able to switch party members later in the game without having to keep them viable by playing them in rotation and I agree with that sentiment. Fair enough?