80 réponses à ce sujet

[Inarai]

JKoopman wrote...

menasure wrote...

well to start one should realize that enemies' levels scale to fit your party in game so it does not really matter that much whether you play the endgame at lvl 18 or at 25.
rpg's are not the standard "get to level 100 as fast as possible" games, it's about enjoying your choices and your part in the whole story.
playing the mastermind or the buffoon have each their own merit in a game like this

But at the same time if I only manage to make it to lvl 18 by endgame that could hinder my ability to develop the character I want by limiting my skills and abilties (21 points and 7 extra skills is alot). Obviously my enjoyment of my character will be lessened if my mage is unable to master the spellschool I wanted or my warrior isn't able to equip that fancy suit of armor because his STR isn't high enough.

What it comes down to, like others have said, is that EXP is more than just understanding how to swing a sword. EXP is learned knowledge, and a character should be able to learn just as much by talking an enemy down as by taking an enemy down. It makes no sense that I can use my acquired experience to enhance my persuasion skills but then gain no experience by making use of those skills.

Well, it's hard to manage in a computer game.  If you're running things in a tabletop scenario, you can make sure things balance out.  Little harder if you have to pre-structure everything.

Now, I can think of some things that would have worked, but this is the wrong forum for that.

[Godeshus]

Persuasion (coercion) is based on the cunning attribute.



With cunning, you can gain experience by unlocking doors and chests



Soon after the start of the game there are many "difficult" chests to unlock, gaining more experience per unlock than the average foe gives you from killing him. Also, acquiring all these extra things can make a huge impact on how much $$ u make throughout the game.



Talking to and persuading people can get you information, or items, that you would not otherwise be able to get.



The story, the way characters interact with eachother, the way the game interacts with you, are always different based on your character choice.



Dragon Age is simply not the type of game where you can get and do everything with one character. It's a game that is dynamic based on the choices you make, and xp is rewarded in different ways throughout accordingly.

[Lacan2]

Yeah, but sometimes those bandits will kill you. That's the tradeoff if you were truly roleplaying: do I risk dying, or try to talk my way out of it?

[Drake Sigar]

My complaint is with the persuasion dialogue itself. Because it seems to often go like this:



Me: "I need to get past the gate."



Guard: "I'm sorry but I've been ordered to keep it locked tight, don't want those sneaky Grey Wardens getting in, and you could be one of them for all I know."



Me: *Waves hand* "I am not the man you're looking for."



Guard: "I'm convinced! Pass friend."



It's the same story with every RPG. Your character never bothers coming up with any persuasive argument, pfft.

[Godeshus]

Lacan2 wrote...

Yeah, but sometimes those bandits will kill you. That's the tradeoff if you were truly roleplaying: do I risk dying, or try to talk my way out of it?

Exactly the point I'm making. That's the choice. XP will be gained at another time, in a different situation, based on the character choices you've made.

It's a flawed argument to look at it one situation at a time. When you look at the big picture, throughout the entire game, a rogue can gain as much XP as warrior or mage does.

It may be a weird analogy, but look at it this way.

A ski resort and an amusement park.

In the Winter time, the ski resort will make a killing, yet bring nothing in the summer.  An amusement park will make a killing in the summer, but nothing in the winter. At the end of the year, however, both businesses are profitable in their own way.

I know, it's a stupid analogy, but I'm just trying to make a point.

Modifié par Godeshus, 30 novembre 2009 - 08:51 .

[Schyzm]

kelsjet wrote...

Fredericol wrote...

Uhm... Fallout 3 you generally get a lot of exp for talking yourself out of situations... sometimes even more than you'd have gotten fighting...

Least I think so... its been a while

I am certain no one stated that you cannot gain rewards (be it XP or loots) from talking. What we are saying is that when we chart out the total amount of 'reward' gained from combat and place it against the total amount of 'reward' gained from talking, the talking would get dwarfed by the combat. This is the case in mostly all RPGs to date. Including Fallout 3.

What I was explaining, is why this is the case. Nothing more.

the talking system is a pretty uninteresting shell compared to the combat system though.  it's just a series of 3-4 choice questions and possibly a die roll at some point.

[Inarai]

Schyzm wrote...

kelsjet wrote...

Fredericol wrote...

Uhm... Fallout 3 you generally get a lot of exp for talking yourself out of situations... sometimes even more than you'd have gotten fighting...

Least I think so... its been a while

I am certain no one stated that you cannot gain rewards (be it XP or loots) from talking. What we are saying is that when we chart out the total amount of 'reward' gained from combat and place it against the total amount of 'reward' gained from talking, the talking would get dwarfed by the combat. This is the case in mostly all RPGs to date. Including Fallout 3.

What I was explaining, is why this is the case. Nothing more.

the talking system is a pretty uninteresting shell compared to the combat system though.  it's just a series of 3-4 choice questions and possibly a die roll at some point.

Pfft.

You se to be using a rather poor system of analysis here - specifically, how active something is, rather than the depth of it's execution.  DA:O is pretty nice on the depth front.

[Zenon]

Drake Sigar wrote...

My complaint is with the persuasion dialogue itself. Because it seems to often go like this:

Me: "I need to get past the gate."

Guard: "I'm sorry but I've been ordered to keep it locked tight, don't want those sneaky Grey Wardens getting in, and you could be one of them for all I know."

Me: *Waves hand* "I am not the man you're looking for."

Guard: "I'm convinced! Pass friend."

It's the same story with every RPG. Your character never bothers coming up with any persuasive argument, pfft.

I haven't seen such dialogue in DA:O. One example is when trying to use persuasion to get Sten. There were still reasons and arguments in the persuasive talk.

Perhaps a powerful Blood Mage could do what you posted, but not a persuasive rogue or warrior. You refer to a kind of Jedi/Trooper dialogue. In Star Wars this Jedi-Ability is not about persuading the target, but rather similar to commanding a hypnotized guy following orders without questions.

[Zenon]

I also think the player should get a reward (XP) for witty dialogue solutions. Actually, if you like complex systems like RoleMaster (hehe), which I played as DM many years ago, one could even get the idea of saying: There are mental XP and physical XP, each being able to be used only to enhance appropriate skills, since it is strange, that a rogue getting XP for talking uses his skillpoints to improve his melee fighting abilities... But then again, lets be reasonable and not make it too complicated because it is a game for fun and not a science (even when RoleMaster came close to that...).



By the way: Why complain about persuasion in ME being linked to paragon play style? In most cases you could as well intimidate instead as renegade with similar effect. And in some cases persuade works better than intimidate or vice versa. Was perfectly fine with me.

[throttlesays]

The problem with granting XP for avoiding combat is that XP is used primarily to boost your combat prowess. There's no logical reason why persuading the bandits to go away will make you better at fighting. This is why the non-combat approach is invalid in modern games where combat is the end-all, be-all of gameplay.



Anyone remember Fallout 1 and 2? It was possible to complete the entire game using stealth, cunning or science. Combat was certainly the most practical approach, and probably more fun as well, but you could finish the primary quest and beat the game while seeing little to no battle. You could build your character with no emphasis on combat skills, and thus it made sense to award XP for things like diplomacy or hacking when this XP could then be used to make you better at diplomacy or hacking.



In modern games, roleplay has been reduced to a vague framework that acts as an excuse to guide the player through a series of combat encounters. You can complete Dragon Age by winning the battles and spamming esc-1-esc-1-esc-1 through every dialogue. The player is required to kill most of the enemies in the game, not just given the option to succeed by doing so, and is generally not given the option to reach the same goal by other means.



This change in game design was made because 90% of the players played the games in the way they are now designed for: kick down the door and charge in, guns blazing, and skim through most of the dialogue. It's generally the more entertaining type of gameplay, but only for the first playthrough, and the replayability is compromised when it's the only way to do it. I do wish they would make games like Fallout 1/2 again where you could start over and complete the game in a completely different way.



If they had designed DA:O the way FA1/2 were, you would have been able to trick all those elves and dwarves to help you rather than convince them by getting your sword bloodied, or you would have been able to pledge your allegience to the Archdemon and join the Blight to fight the good people. How's that for a second playthrough?

[elearon1]

Inarai wrote...

Reward should be based on overcoming challenge. Swinging a sword at it is not the only, nor always the best way to go about this.

Precisely ... for that matter, I have long fealt that games gave the shaft to rogues who sneak their way through most encounters - sneaking is a primary attribute of the roguish class/lifestyle, after all.  Me, I think one should receive xp for areas as well - surviving past them by whatever means you can manage.  Thus, if I sneak through an entire section in the darkspawn area in the dwarven lands (don't recall the name) I should receive xp for doing so.  That said, I do believe the amount you get should only be about 1/2 -2/3 what you'd have got if you fought your way through ... after all, the threat to your safety isn't nearly as great.  (though, stealth systems which require you maintain cover, and carefully stick to shadows should give more, as there is skill to that in addition to merely having the ability)

[Pseron Wyrd]

Alistair Crowley wrote...
Let persuasion reduce the opposing threat in some cases. You might intimidate or persuade some enemies to flee or come to your side before the battle starts.

This is a great idea. I love it. *thumbs up*

[Godeshus]

Pseron Wyrd wrote...

Alistair Crowley wrote...
Let persuasion reduce the opposing threat in some cases. You might intimidate or persuade some enemies to flee or come to your side before the battle starts.

This is a great idea. I love it. *thumbs up*

I'm reminded of a scenario in NWN 2, where you could convince Jackben? (can't remember his name) to fight for you instead of the mage he was supposed to be defending.

[P_k_r]

That's why Planescape: Torment is my favourite CRPG. In a nutshell - talking was more profitable than just killing everyone/thing.

[Elanareon]

Well it is a roleplaying game If you don't want to fight that guy according to the role you play you'll do it regardless of the outcome or rewards.

[astrallite]

In Baldur's Gate 2, avoiding fights in "die or parlay situations" while taking the diplomatic approach during quests was rewarded. You could either fight and take loot and have a little experience points, or you could talk your way out of it, no loot, but a lot of experience points.



In Dragon Age you can either have all the experience points and loot, or nothing. In other words, the looting, chest unlocking, psychotic killer is the ultimate character.

[Tennmuerti]

Hmmm I am suddenly reminded of a certain quest in DA:O that if you have low coercion you can only get 20 gold or even nothing, but if you have high coercion you can get 58 gold and an item.

That is just one dramatic example, there are several quests from what I remember that offer better rewards overall if you have developed coercion.



Plus I do not really see the big downside to having good talking skills, the main character gets bonus skill points and there are not that many useful skills for you to take that the rest of the party cannot provide. 4 points in coercion are a no brainer. With your starting cunning attribute plus the bonus attributes you can get at the beginning part of main quest, you can do the majority of persuade options in the game already, only the difficult ones require some extra investment into cunning.

[F-C]

i think too many people have this idea that since you can persuade an enemy to let you by without fighting, then you must do that... which is rather silly.

i build my character with high coercion skill not to pass encounters where i will earn loot and xp, but for the normal dialogue choices that open up new options and information you would otherwise not get.

just for some non spoiler made up examples:

im in a tavern talking to joe the npc, he knows something but doesnt want to tell me, i have high persuasion and talk him into it, i can now go get some uber item.

then there is

i run into bandit squad who wants to kill me and wont let me pass. i have the option to pesuade them to let me pass. i choose not to and just kill them so i can get the loot and xp.

its still your choice weather to use it or not.

Modifié par F-C, 30 novembre 2009 - 12:43 .

[Koralis]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Viewpoint 1: You've avoided combat. Why should you get the XP and loot that combat brings when you don't have to go through the difficulty of the combat itself? RPGs never reward you for avoiding content and combat is 80% of the content. In this view, persuade is the easy but less rewarding path the player chooses.

They give XP for unlocking chests and disabling traps.  It's ridiculous that they wouldn't give XP for exercising a different skill, even if you miss out on some loot.

In Baldur's Gate 2, avoiding fights in "die or parlay situations" while taking the diplomatic approach during quests was rewarded. You could either fight and take loot and have a little experience points, or you could talk your way out of it, no loot, but a lot of experience points.

Yeah, they've gone backward.  One of the things I loved about BG2 was gaining XP through dialog, whether it's talking people out of things, or displaying knowlege of a situation that is helpful, etc.

Modifié par Koralis, 30 novembre 2009 - 01:10 .

[Khumak]

My problem with the way persuasion works in this game is it's normally only used to avoid fights or convince people to give you more money than they normally would.



The first option is pretty pointless. You're basically replacing a potentially fun encounter with a dialog option that says "go away" or "give me that". On top of that, you're spending XP on skills to avoid combat which makes you less powerful for the inevitable mandatory fights.



The second option just means a bit more money.



What they should have done is made persuasion give you an advantage in each encounter that you use it for instead of entirely eliminating the encounter. For instance, you wander into a warehouse and are confronted by the guards. Without persuasion, a scripted "no prep" fight starts and you get to fight all the guards. At the end, you find out the boss escaped. With persuasion, you talk your way in, get yourself in position to ambush the guards, and then get to fight the boss that DIDN'T escape...

[fro7k]

I actually avoided progressing further in several locations because of being unable to take certain dialog options due to not enough coercion skill, and went away to level up some. Only to find that there was little difference made as a result.

[MR-9]

Khumak you make an excellent point. Each time you talk yourself out of a fight is like shooting yourself in the foot.



"Oh no thanks, I'll pass on the loot and XP because I'd rather it not come to blows."

[Sidney]

Koralis wrote...

Yeah, they've gone backward.  One of the things I loved about BG2 was gaining XP through dialog, whether it's talking people out of things, or displaying knowlege of a situation that is helpful, etc.

Do we know that you don't? I know you don't see the XP float go by and I assumed you didn't until last night.

I was in camp, close to leveling up and I was chatting up Wynne when I unlocked her first skill and levelled my character up at the same time. There was no XP marker floating by but since I was in camp there was, obviously, nothing else I was doing so do dialog options give you XP but we just don't see it?

[Alistair Crowley]

I think that even if I can choose to not persuade my way through a potential combat encounter, the persuasion option should give some other result than no xp & no loot. If there is no "mechanical" motivator to ever choose some option, then most players will just not choose it and fight instead even if their character is skilled in persuade.



To me, it adds to the fun of the game to have your cake and eat it too. If I have persuasion, I'd like to have it benefit me when I use it (if the check succeeds) and possibly have a failed check hurt me, to have some risk-reward ratio that makes it interesting.

[Serenity84]

You can easily be level 23 or so at the end and talk your way out of many situations.



You miss out on a lot of content if you don't use persuasion or intimidation now and then. And you can also miss out on items and gold. There are plenty of encounters where you can ask people for a reward or a higher reward. There is a quest where you can easily earn 30 sovereigns if you can persuade both ends. Other times fighting gains you a good item. It depends.



At the end, the loss in XP is negligible. Especially compared to the better roleplaying experience. Sometimes it just makes more sense to avoid certain fights.