17 réponses à ce sujet

[Games For Learning]

Hi All,

I've been reading through what other developers like before starting my next module. I'm torn about the OM.

On the one hand, it is neat for showing the distance travelled between cities and things. It does certainly add flavour in that way.

On the other hand, you can't prepare before encounters (unless there is a deadzone "foyer" when you enter an area) with things that like Awaken or persistent spells.

On the other hand, it saves some effort in designing exterior areas between each place.

On the other hand, I'm okay with an area transition from one area to another far away area if the conversations have been designed appropriately.

So, I'm looking for opinions to help with this four handed juggling. Just because the OM tool is available, doesn't mean that it is the way to go. What do you like about it, what do you not like, as a player and a builder?

Thanks.

[Tonytobinus]

Well, it all comes down to the focus of the adventure. If it is character or plot driven, I would recommend using the fastest means of getting the player from point A to point B. Explain away the travel time however you wish, but protagonists with a specific, urgent goal would not take the time to admire the scenery and search for lost treasure along the way. It will only serve as a distraction that will downplay the importance of the main quest.



However, if your story ties closely into the setting, opportunities to explore would do wonders for it. Lost ruins, geographic wonders, and small roadside villages will help flesh out the history and lore of the land. Even if what the player stumbles upon does not tie directly into the story, it can create a greater sense of investment in the world they're defending (destroying?).



So short answer, it's all about which method provides better immersion in the kind of story you are telling.

[Hellfire_RWS]

I 100% prefer Overland maps as a Player.

The ability to find hidden places, the sense of travel, and the random overland map encounters add way more to the game IMO than the issue of not being able to buff before a fight.



Perhaps for overland encounters you can make options, like you surprise the enemy or the enemy surprises you. If the enemy surprise you, the combat starts as soon as you enter the encounter area. If you surprise them you get say. 30 - 60 seconds before the encounter spawns on the map?



Just a though.

[_Knightmare_]

Agreed with Hellfire above.

Also, is your next module going to be instructional like your last? If so, then I can see how you might be able to incorporate things like learning basics of geography and geology in to an OM.

Modifié par _Knightmare_, 29 août 2010 - 02:55 .

[kamalpoe]

It's a good way to nerf those combat clerics by preventing them from buffing all to heck.



I enjoy an OM tremendously for the sense of exploration it gives.

[Games For Learning]

Thanks for the ideas. I am planning another instructional-type module, so perhaps the OM is the way to go. I have to be careful with the random encounters, though. I found after a while when playing SOZ that I would go out of my way to avoid encounters because they were so boring. Even encounters that were a couple of levels above my characters were no challenge with the equipment I was able to get (SOZ seems to have some issues with making money from trades).



I just don't want the players to keep running into things that they don't want to or need to, as Tonytobinus suggested.



I guess that it isn't too big a deal to not be able to buff. It does drop the value of a number of abilities and spells (like persistent haste, awaken, and many warlock spells). I'm less concerned about the ability to defeat things than I am about the speed of play. Perhaps that is my own projecting... I like to be able to quickly discover things of value and encounters just get in the way.

[_Knightmare_]

You don't need to have the wandering encounters at all if you don't want to. Otherwise you can script them to do specific things, like spawn only once (or other set number of times).

[Hellfire_RWS]

Games For Learning wrote...

 I like to be able to quickly discover things of value and encounters just get in the way.

See im competely different. I think the search itself is jsut as much fun as the find.

I never completed the OC or MOTB they bored me, but I LOOOOVED SOZ.  I played and beat SOZ twice.

The real important part is, make what you enjoy making.

[PJ156]

I am with Tonytobias on this, a story led adventure may lose focus with an OM. My preference has been to not have one at the moment.

That said it does not have to be massive nor do you have to stick with one exclusivly. If I do one for my mods when I campaign them it will be small, just connecting the main areas that are within say an hour of each other. I will jump to distant areas to aviod big maps and to avoid ruining the direction/pace of the story.

Best of both worlds I hope. Of course I don't know how to make one yet but that's another story.

PJ

Modifié par PJ156, 29 août 2010 - 06:41 .

[Games For Learning]

This is exactly the type of discussion I was hoping for.



There are some people who want to explore, encounter, discover and others who want to focus on the story, solve a mystery, uncover a plot. I'll have to try and engage both for my next module to be effective. I'm shooting at a grade 9/10 boy and girl audience.



I think using an OM as a home base might work. I'm thinking along the lines of the originial NWN here. They had a city as a home base and had four different directions you could travel. Instead of having a huge central city, I could make a small town and center it on an OM. The OM then takes you in any direction to explore the surroundings and uncover the plot. That way there will be plenty of random encounters possible with searching for hidden gems, but at the same time let me work on the plot.



After the map has been explored sufficiently, the group can then move to a totally different region with a new OM.



Hmmm...

[MokahTGS]

 You can use the overland map encounter conversations to prebuff your party based on skills and feats and spells if you like.  The mod author just has to prepare for that via the conversation setup.  Some of the standard SoZ conversations already have all the skill checks built it.

As a matter of preference, I agree with Hellfire as to the OM's appeal as a player.  What it comes down to is module focus, and if you want those types of encounters.  Some modules benefit from it, but if it's just something you're adding, then that is another matter.

[Games For Learning]

Thanks Mokah.



I noticed on another thread that you believe SoZ to be a builder's game. Do you have any examples of things people are doing using the new tools differently? I've been searching through the forums for ideas before I start.



I'm not sure if you meant the whole OM thing or not.

[dunniteowl]

Well the crafting system was completely redone. It opened up more possibilities for crafting, like successfully collecting supplies out in the wild, which I don't know if it was in MotB (haven't played Mask of the Betrayer) but it definitely wasn't in the OC (Original Campaign.)

Party Conversation System. Allows you to create conversation changes and allows folks with the highest skill to be used in the conversation. The old method was the Party Leader (the Player Character in all cases) was the only character the Skill checks were used on, so having a high Diplomacy character in your party then that wasn't the PC, was moot. Not true anymore.

I believe that's what Mokah's referring to when she mentions the SoZ being a "Builder's Game." Meaning that the story wasn't all that great, but the features and enhancements to the game allow the building portion of the Community even greater creative flexibility to use these features. And of course, we all know that many folks in the Community are going to warp bend and shape these tools to other uses that the developers could not possibly have fathomed when they made them.

Overland Map: this is all scripted and has the ability to do all sorts of things within the context of gaming in NWN2. Again, the initial system is set up by the devs (with possibly a hat of thanks tossed to Adam Miller who created something like this with just the OC on his own) and there are potentials and possibilities in it that can only be explored and opened up by the building and scripting portions of the Community. And there is plenty of room for creative adaptation there I am certain.

That's my take on SoZ being a "builder's game."
dunniteowl

Modifié par dunniteowl, 29 août 2010 - 10:53 .

[Shallina]

I prefer the worldmap system to the overland one. But that's maybe beceause most use of the OL map was to be lazy and avoid exterior area making.



My problem with the OL map, is that to make something awesome with it, it would require a lot of more work, and I prefer the focus to be put into real area.

[Banshe]

If you do choose to make one, this thread might come in handy:



http://nwcitadel.for...read.php?t=1844

[dunniteowl]

I'm actually a fan of both systems for different reasons. I could see using both of them if possible. One series of trips on the OM to discover new areas, locate new things, and then a quick transition with the WM to go back and forth to places you've gone to (or will need to) repeatedly. That way, you could offer characters a quick flash trip (via world map) or a leisurely stroll (via overland map) when they transit.

I'd also offer that WM use for making city maps as well as full on transitions might be another good use of the tools.

Someone once mentioned maybe using the OM for a city travel adventure and that does have it's appeal, except that the locked camera does make it somewhat problematic for seeing all that you can see in a city environment.

When playing, the Overland Map system provides a very different feel to it than regular transitions or the use of the World Map. I also disagree that using the OM is laziness and avoiding making "real areas" as the use of the OM requires a completely different set of mental perspectives. You certainly cannot just 'whip one out' in a few hours. It really is a completely different design intent.

The WM does the same, in this regard as the OM. You don't have to design all those in-between areas, because you instantly transit and there's no scripting of encounters along the way, no resting concerns, no wandering monsters, no -- well you see the point.

Both the WM and OM have their definite uses and I think both, when possible, should be incorporated into an adventure if the atmosphere of their use supports what you're attempting to do.



Sandbox exploration? Overland Map.

Lots of repeat travel? World Map.



It's not about saving areas and the time it takes to create them, its about not punishing the player for your vision with overly long stretches of area transitions, unnecessary travel that does not aid gameplay and the novel/cinematic concept of 'compression of time and space,' where you allow time savings in the story and action in order to advance the story itself without too much grinding away at walking, walking, walking, walking all over the place.

dunniteowl

[LeeMer47]

I would use the World Map. You can still have random encounters. For encounters you can set up the monster spawn point far enough away from the player enter point so that it is outside perception range. This allows you to buff up before engaging in combat.

[Games For Learning]

Banshe, thanks for the info... it looks pretty complete!



Dunniteowl,

I like the "Best of both worlds" approach of giving the option to transition directly between areas or to travel using the OM. I'm sure there's a way to script in random encounters if a player wants to just transition there, but with more control so that the random encounters enhance the plot. I think I'll try to do it like that.



Now, did anyone invent that time machine yet?