623 réponses à ce sujet

[TEWR]

In Exile wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Question: Would people accept the Final Fantasy variant of unavailable characters being implemented? They get knocked unconscious, stay unconscious until you heal them, and are then usable again.

I think the injury mechanic, if it was far more punishing (e.g. far less injury kits, each injury cuts all stats to half their pre-injury value, HP/Mana in half and they compounded until the character was unuseable would be better) would be superior.

Hmm... that sounds interesting.

Perhaps they could use both your suggestion in conjunction with the FF variant? They fall in battle and stay fallen until you heal them. Then they're usable again, but they're injured severely and aren't as strong as they would be if they were perfectly healed.

And then when you get an injury kit, you use it on them.

[DreamwareStudio]

esper wrote...

@Ehtereal, the final fantasy way is how I percieve the battle in this regard. You tend to their wound immediealty after the battle before moving on because dragging and unconsious person with you is not viable and remember that there is no healing temple/water/moggle/tent in dragon age, instead you have the healing bandages. I could live with injuries only being tended once you returned to homebase, though, and completely forego the magical injuri pack.

I like that idea, too, especially if it's not so easy getting back to homebase.

[esper]

google_calasade wrote...

esper wrote...

It is not because he is dead. It is because I have to have an ethical debate with his wife about raising him or not. It is because the theoretical options exits to have him raised which means that I can take no dead in the universe seriously unless their body is mutiliated or shattered if I understood Yrkoons explanation right. I cannot take death seriously in such a universe.  Hawkes family cannot just be dragged to the nearest chantry and ressurected that is the point.

Neither could Khalid.  He was actually beyond the state of resurrection.

As for party members, sometimes it took a bit more than simply getting to the nearest chantry.  Sometimes it failed, but in either case there were usually consequences, which is my main argument.

Regarding the death of party members, I just don't see how consequential deaths are cheaper than DA 2 or DA:O where no death is consequential, that as soon as the battle is over everyone returns to life and full health via a bit of injury kit.  I guess we differ on that point, but as stated many times previously, there are roleplaying aspects lost because of how DA handles it.

But they are not dead they are knocked out. In baldur gate they are dead. There is a colossal difference in the fact that it is an in game lore accepted ability to bring people back from the dead and not just a combat mechanic that does not exist in the lore.  
It is either permantly dead which means permenantly which in DA would mean game over if any companion die or they do not die in combat.

[DreamwareStudio]

esper wrote...

But they are not dead they are knocked out. In baldur gate they are dead. There is a colossal difference in the fact that it is an in game lore accepted ability to bring people back from the dead and not just a combat mechanic that does not exist in the lore.  
It is either permantly dead which means permenantly which in DA would mean game over if any companion die or they do not die in combat.

Then that brings up another suspension of belief issue, a huge one, IMO.  How can someone never die from battle, whereas the worst thing that ever happens from what should be a fight-to-the-death is unconsciousness and relatively minor injuries?  To be in the crushing grasp of an Ogre while his other massive fist pummels the party member into squish and they don't have crushed lungs, broken ribs, spine, etc.  To behead a foe but have that never happen to a party member in return...there are literally countless examples where suspension of belief shoud be shattered.

Seems to me those are bigger issues than having death overcome.

Modifié par google_calasade, 14 janvier 2012 - 08:36 .

[esper]

google_calasade wrote...

esper wrote...

@Ehtereal, the final fantasy way is how I percieve the battle in this regard. You tend to their wound immediealty after the battle before moving on because dragging and unconsious person with you is not viable and remember that there is no healing temple/water/moggle/tent in dragon age, instead you have the healing bandages. I could live with injuries only being tended once you returned to homebase, though, and completely forego the magical injuri pack.

I like that idea, too, especially if it's not so easy getting back to homebase.

Well in that case I guess we have some sort of compromise. A further compromise is that injury kits only exits on easy and normal but not on hard and nightmare. I still remember my first nightmare deep road expidition where I had not the skills I have now and Anders and Carver was constantly complaining over me not healing them becaue their max health was reduced to a third/fourht of the original max health, that was punishing indeed and extremely hard since I realised that perhaps I should have looked better after them in combat.   

[In Exile]

google_calasade wrote...
Then that brings up another suspension of belief issue.  How can someone never die from battle, whereas the worst thing that ever happens from what should be a fight-to-the-death is unconsciousness and relatively minor injuries?

Having no one react to death, and getting into make-up your own fan-fiction territory is just worse for some people, e.g. for me. That no one ever gets hurt in combat is no less ridiculous than the things you kill consistently in RPGs, e.g. like 5-7 eldrich horrors a game.

[Yrkoon]

Personally, I think games should employ more necromancy.   A party member can die, and you can raise them.  But they come back as Zombies instead of themselves,  and they come back bearing all the wounds that  killed them.

So you say a Pride Demon just  beheaded Fenris?  No problem, just raise him and let him be the headless Draugir he was meant to be!

Modifié par Yrkoon, 14 janvier 2012 - 08:38 .

[Pzykozis]

google_calasade wrote...
As for some of what I've seen...the impatience, not wanting to deal with consequences, wishing for less difficulty, seeing challenge as a deterrent, the poor excuses for reloading and circumventing the spirit of the game, well, I don't have much to say, except to ask why play on anything above easy if when something bad happens you simply reload the game?

... Thats a massive logical flaw, I always play on the highest difficulty levels, the fact that I enforce a strict no loss rule actually increases challenge (and that's mainly why I do it) since I could easily sacrifice one or more people in a battle and still win.

I like challenge as much as anyone who really, really likes challenge.

What I don't like is pointless time sinks or forced loss of content dependant on a games random factor.

There is literally nothing challenging about having someone die permanently or dying until you drag them to a church, it just breaks up gameplay, oh no someone got incapacitated guess I'll just run for a few minutes to the church... (really? That adds to the game how?) or even better I just ran to a church for X amount of minutes and the game decided that no they're disintergrated and I just lost access to X% of content of the game because the game rolled some dice and I was unlucky? Screw that.

It's not challenging or fun to run from a battlefield to a church, nor is it challenging or fun to have that dead person disintegrated because of random.

Consequences have to add to the game, they need to bring something to the table, bringing irritation is not adding to the game, it's taking away.

[DreamwareStudio]

esper wrote...

google_calasade wrote...

esper wrote...

@Ehtereal, the final fantasy way is how I percieve the battle in this regard. You tend to their wound immediealty after the battle before moving on because dragging and unconsious person with you is not viable and remember that there is no healing temple/water/moggle/tent in dragon age, instead you have the healing bandages. I could live with injuries only being tended once you returned to homebase, though, and completely forego the magical injuri pack.

I like that idea, too, especially if it's not so easy getting back to homebase.

Well in that case I guess we have some sort of compromise. A further compromise is that injury kits only exits on easy and normal but not on hard and nightmare.

That I love.

[In Exile]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Hmm... that sounds interesting.

Perhaps they could use both your suggestion in conjunction with the FF variant? They fall in battle and stay fallen until you heal them. Then they're usable again, but they're injured severely and aren't as strong as they would be if they were perfectly healed.

And then when you get an injury kit, you use it on them.

I'd say "crippled" rather than "unconscious" should be the name of the status effect, but that's just quibbling.

I'd also make it so that getting back to your camp/town does not heal injuries. I'd make it so you need a medic for tthat or a healer specialization for the PC or NPCs (after which, you can revive people after battle sans injury and you can heal at your camp/town).

EDIT:

Alternatively, the stat penalty could be lower and there could be a medicine skill that lets you alievate say 50% of the side effects you suffer. and restore those abilities to pre-injury. That way, there is a strategic element as well.

Modifié par In Exile, 14 janvier 2012 - 08:40 .

[esper]

google_calasade wrote...

esper wrote...

But they are not dead they are knocked out. In baldur gate they are dead. There is a colossal difference in the fact that it is an in game lore accepted ability to bring people back from the dead and not just a combat mechanic that does not exist in the lore.  
It is either permantly dead which means permenantly which in DA would mean game over if any companion die or they do not die in combat.

Then that brings up another suspension of belief issue.  How can someone never die from battle, whereas the worst thing that ever happens from what should be a fight-to-the-death is unconsciousness and relatively minor injuries?

I have already adress that as the enemies being to busy with the consiousness party members to have time to check that the K.O. are dead. Of course it is a suspension of belief and takes seriosu metagaming, but I personally think it is better than a whole universe where dead is cheap.

It  would be even better if the enemy too had a paneca/revieal/regroup skill such that the same counts for them that counts for your party, but that is a question of enemy skills which I think should be the same as the party in case of human, such as your party not having the time to enusre that enemies are dead too before the time is over and you in meta game goes around and check every dead body. But that is another issue with enemies not having the same skills as the group.

[DreamwareStudio]

esper wrote...

google_calasade wrote...

esper wrote...

But they are not dead they are knocked out. In baldur gate they are dead. There is a colossal difference in the fact that it is an in game lore accepted ability to bring people back from the dead and not just a combat mechanic that does not exist in the lore.  
It is either permantly dead which means permenantly which in DA would mean game over if any companion die or they do not die in combat.

Then that brings up another suspension of belief issue.  How can someone never die from battle, whereas the worst thing that ever happens from what should be a fight-to-the-death is unconsciousness and relatively minor injuries?

I have already adress that as the enemies being to busy with the consiousness party members to have time to check that the K.O. are dead. Of course it is a suspension of belief and takes seriosu metagaming, but I personally think it is better than a whole universe where dead is cheap.

It  would be even better if the enemy too had a paneca/revieal/regroup skill such that the same counts for them that counts for your party, but that is a question of enemy skills which I think should be the same as the party in case of human, such as your party not having the time to enusre that enemies are dead too before the time is over and you in meta game goes around and check every dead body. But that is another issue with enemies not having the same skills as the group.

That's metagaming of which I am incapable.  In battle, you make sure the fallen are dead.  You don't put someone down and not apply a killing blow because they may rise and kill you.

I love the idea of an enemy having revival skills.  That would be a beotch.

[TEWR]

In Exile wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Hmm... that sounds interesting.

Perhaps they could use both your suggestion in conjunction with the FF variant? They fall in battle and stay fallen until you heal them. Then they're usable again, but they're injured severely and aren't as strong as they would be if they were perfectly healed.

And then when you get an injury kit, you use it on them.

I'd say "crippled" rather than "unconscious" should be the name of the status effect, but that's just quibbling.

I'd also make it so that getting back to your camp/town does not heal injuries. I'd make it so you need a medic for tthat or a healer specialization for the PC or NPCs (after which, you can revive people after battle sans injury and you can heal at your camp/town).

I like this.

We go to town, find a doctor, pay for his services to help heal the party, and we get healed.

Alternatively Spirit Healer members of the party can heal the injured. However, perhaps if they happen to be the ones that fell in battle their abilities can only heal to a small extent (or alternatively their abilities can't work until they're healed themselves)?

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 14 janvier 2012 - 08:43 .

[esper]

google_calasade wrote...

esper wrote...

google_calasade wrote...

esper wrote...

@Ehtereal, the final fantasy way is how I percieve the battle in this regard. You tend to their wound immediealty after the battle before moving on because dragging and unconsious person with you is not viable and remember that there is no healing temple/water/moggle/tent in dragon age, instead you have the healing bandages. I could live with injuries only being tended once you returned to homebase, though, and completely forego the magical injuri pack.

I like that idea, too, especially if it's not so easy getting back to homebase.

Well in that case I guess we have some sort of compromise. A further compromise is that injury kits only exits on easy and normal but not on hard and nightmare.

That I love.

We agree on something, the end of the world is here!   
The only thing sad about these discussion is that even if to oppostites group like us can find something we both enjoy it is not likely that the designer actually are listning on the tread anymore.

[DreamwareStudio]

esper wrote...




We agree on something, the end of the world is here!   

LMAO!

esper wrote...
The only thing sad about these discussion is that even if to oppostites group like us can find something we both enjoy it is not likely that the designer actually are listning on the tread anymore.

I hope they look as there are some very valid points from both sides of the fence made after the last posts by Laidlaw and Epler.

[Yrkoon]

Pzykozis wrote...


It's not challenging or fun to run from a battlefield to a church, nor is it challenging or fun to have that dead person disintegrated because of random.

No, but it is challenging   and memorable to  suddenly lose your healer, or your Tank when you're on the second level of a 4 level dungeon.  Do you continue on and try to finish the dungeon without their services?  or do you trudge their bodies back to town, pay a large sum of gold to a priest to have them raised  (Money that you were saving in order to purchase  that special weapon you had your eye on   in the shop down the street.  But now you can't buy it, because you f**ked up in battle and let your mage die.)  

Modifié par Yrkoon, 14 janvier 2012 - 08:54 .

[DreamwareStudio]

Yrkoon wrote...

Pzykozis wrote...


It's not challenging or fun to run from a battlefield to a church, nor is it challenging or fun to have that dead person disintegrated because of random.

No, but it is challenging   and memorable to  suddenly lose your healer, or your mage when you're on the second level of a 4 level dungeon.  Do you continue on and try to finish the dungeon without their services?  or do you trudge their bodies back to town, pay a large sum of gold to a priest to have them raised  (Money that you were saving in order to purchase  for that special weapon you had your eye on   in the shop down the street.  But now you can't buy it, because you f**ked up in battle and let your mage die.)  

Bingo.  Consequence.

[In Exile]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
I like this.

We go to town, find a doctor, pay for his services to help heal the party, and we get healed.

Alternatively Spirit Healer members of the party can heal the injured. However, perhaps if they happen to be the ones that fell in battle their abilities can only heal to a small extent (or alternatively their abilities can't work until they're healed themselves)?

I vote no on crippled SH being able to heal anyone. That makes their tactical role in the part far more valuable, because if the SH is crippled, then the whole party falls. It provides another layer of strategy, too, in terms of how you want to build and structure your party.

That being said, I think it's crucial to have a open skill to all party members that can do this without an SH so no one is locked into having the SH in the party.

[esper]

google_calasade wrote...

esper wrote...

google_calasade wrote...

esper wrote...

But they are not dead they are knocked out. In baldur gate they are dead. There is a colossal difference in the fact that it is an in game lore accepted ability to bring people back from the dead and not just a combat mechanic that does not exist in the lore.  
It is either permantly dead which means permenantly which in DA would mean game over if any companion die or they do not die in combat.

Then that brings up another suspension of belief issue.  How can someone never die from battle, whereas the worst thing that ever happens from what should be a fight-to-the-death is unconsciousness and relatively minor injuries?

I have already adress that as the enemies being to busy with the consiousness party members to have time to check that the K.O. are dead. Of course it is a suspension of belief and takes seriosu metagaming, but I personally think it is better than a whole universe where dead is cheap.

It  would be even better if the enemy too had a paneca/revieal/regroup skill such that the same counts for them that counts for your party, but that is a question of enemy skills which I think should be the same as the party in case of human, such as your party not having the time to enusre that enemies are dead too before the time is over and you in meta game goes around and check every dead body. But that is another issue with enemies not having the same skills as the group.

That's metagaming of which I am incapable.  In battle, you make sure the fallen are dead.  You don't put someone down and not apply a killing blow because they may rise and kill you.

I love the idea of an enemy having revival skills.  That would be a beotch.

if someone drops at your feet and their friend is two second away from hammering you with a giant axe you might not have the time to check if you merly knocked them out or they are death since said friend would kill you if you paused. But yes it is metagaming and a question of what one prefer. I would rather metagame than knowing that dead is cheap though. .

Alternertively we could have it as in mass effect where shepard death = game over, just anyone from party death = game over, but to pull that off the game needs a much, much better companion AI because frankly they are idiots even with the best tactics on if you don't micro them.

[TEWR]

In Exile wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
I like this.

We go to town, find a doctor, pay for his services to help heal the party, and we get healed.

Alternatively Spirit Healer members of the party can heal the injured. However, perhaps if they happen to be the ones that fell in battle their abilities can only heal to a small extent (or alternatively their abilities can't work until they're healed themselves)?

I vote no on crippled SH being able to heal anyone. That makes their tactical role in the part far more valuable, because if the SH is crippled, then the whole party falls. It provides another layer of strategy, too, in terms of how you want to build and structure your party.

That being said, I think it's crucial to have a open skill to all party members that can do this without an SH so no one is locked into having the SH in the party.

The return of the Herbalist skill set?

But instead of you being able to make injury kits that heal everything -- since those could be mass produced in DAO -- you make injury kits that only heal a fraction of what the injury did? And they can't add up to heal everything. So you can heal/reduce some of your party's injuries, but you can't completely heal them.

I dunno. I'm more savvy on tactics enemies could use that would add a layer of strategy to how the player fights then what should happen on the players' spectrum of the battle and would add some strategy.

[DreamwareStudio]

esper wrote...

if someone drops at your feet and their friend is two second away from hammering you with a giant axe you might not have the time to check if you merly knocked them out or they are death since said friend would kill you if you paused. But yes it is metagaming and a question of what one prefer. I would rather metagame than knowing that dead is cheap though. .

But that would not be the case all of the time.  What really gets me is something I mentioned in an earlier edit, how enemies can be beheaded for instance, lose their limbs, etc., and yet that never happens to my PC or a party member.

esper wrote...
Alternertively we could have it as in mass effect where shepard death = game over, just anyone from party death = game over, but to pull that off the game needs a much, much better companion AI because frankly they are idiots even with the best tactics on if you don't micro them.

Death = game over.  I like it.  Great point, too, on the AI.  I tend to micro them because if I don't, well, they do some stupid crap. LOL

[TEWR]

esper wrote...


if someone drops at your feet and their friend is two second away from hammering you with a giant axe you might not have the time to check if you merly knocked them out or they are death since said friend would kill you if you paused. But yes it is metagaming and a question of what one prefer. I would rather metagame than knowing that dead is cheap though. .

Alternertively we could have it as in mass effect where shepard death = game over, just anyone from party death = game over, but to pull that off the game needs a much, much better companion AI because frankly they are idiots even with the best tactics on if you don't micro them.

I wouldn't like it if you got a game over just because one companion died or if the PC died. FFXIII did that also with the party leader and that was one of the cons of that game. If the party leader died, you got a game over and after a while it just got more annoying than strategic.

[Pzykozis]

Yrkoon wrote...

Pzykozis wrote...


It's not challenging or fun to run from a battlefield to a church, nor is it challenging or fun to have that dead person disintegrated because of random.

No, but it is challenging   and memorable to  suddenly lose your healer, or your mage when you're on the second level of a 4 level dungeon.  Do you continue on and try to finish the dungeon without their services?  or do you trudge their bodies back to town, pay a large sum of gold to a priest to have them raised  (Money that you were saving in order to purchase  that special weapon you had your eye on   in the shop down the street.  But now you can't buy it, because you f**ked up in battle and let your mage die.)  

That's... not challenging. It's an option but there's no challenge in simply leaving and getting revived. As for memorable whether that's a good thing or a bad thing would be dependant on preferences I'd say. I don't understand why you'd purposefully handicap yourself and continue, that makes no sense to me.

Money, time and gameplay wise, It's an inconvenience, but inconvenience and challenge aren't the same things. It's challenging to fight a room full of elite opponenets all at once, it's not a challenge once that is over to drag a corpse to a church to get revived, the cost of that revival is an inconvenience. If the item in the shop is mandatory to gameplay somehow then perhaps the inconvenience causes a more challenging game, but really if an item in a shop is that important then really to me the game has balance issues.

Besides if such were the case, then It'd be mandatory to keep a healer on tap, i.e. someone that can revive people from the dead. I'd think people daft to not keep a person who can revive nearby at all times but also keep them out of the fight since they're too valuable to risk in that.

Modifié par Pzykozis, 14 janvier 2012 - 09:04 .

[DreamwareStudio]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

esper wrote...


if someone drops at your feet and their friend is two second away from hammering you with a giant axe you might not have the time to check if you merly knocked them out or they are death since said friend would kill you if you paused. But yes it is metagaming and a question of what one prefer. I would rather metagame than knowing that dead is cheap though. .

Alternertively we could have it as in mass effect where shepard death = game over, just anyone from party death = game over, but to pull that off the game needs a much, much better companion AI because frankly they are idiots even with the best tactics on if you don't micro them.

I wouldn't like it if you got a game over just because one companion died or if the PC died. FFXIII did that also with the party leader and that was one of the cons of that game. If the party leader died, you got a game over and after a while it just got more annoying than strategic.

Then how about a normal/easy where that doesn't happen but on hard and nightmare levels, it's a different story?

[DreamwareStudio]

Pzykozis wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Pzykozis wrote...


It's not challenging or fun to run from a battlefield to a church, nor is it challenging or fun to have that dead person disintegrated because of random.

No, but it is challenging   and memorable to  suddenly lose your healer, or your mage when you're on the second level of a 4 level dungeon.  Do you continue on and try to finish the dungeon without their services?  or do you trudge their bodies back to town, pay a large sum of gold to a priest to have them raised  (Money that you were saving in order to purchase  that special weapon you had your eye on   in the shop down the street.  But now you can't buy it, because you f**ked up in battle and let your mage die.)  

That's... not challenging. It's an option but there's no challenge in simply leaving and getting revived. As for memorable whether that's a good thing or a bad thing would be dependant on preferences I'd say. I don't understand why you'd purposefully handicap yourself and continue, that makes no sense to me.

Money, time and gameplay wise, It's an inconvenience, but inconvenience and challenge aren't the same things. It's challenging to fight a room full of elite opponenets all at once, it's not a challenge once that is over to drag a corpse to a church to get revived, the cost of that revival is an inconvenience. If the item in the shop is mandatory to gameplay somehow then perhaps the inconvenience causes a more challenging game, but really if an item in a shop is that important then really to me the game has balance issues.

It's a challenge if there are obstacles to leaving and getting somewhere.  It's a challenge if you have to earn enough coin to afford it.  It can be made a rather huge challenge with additional roleplaying opportunities and not just a chore to be done.  It also provides consequence of choice.  All of that will certainly make you play more strategically, and wince at a failed outcome.  Thus, the battles become more meaningful.

Modifié par google_calasade, 14 janvier 2012 - 09:05 .