167 réponses à ce sujet

[Provi-dance]

The DA2 way of "distinctive classes" with arbitrary restrictions is obviously the wrong way.

[wsandista]

I have no problem with classes having distinct abilities(Paladin's Smite Evil comes to mind), but there should be multiple ways to build an effective character of any class.

For example, if I have a warrior, I should be able to make them a 2hander focused on dealing massive damage with each swing, a dual-wielder adept at overwhelming foes with a high number of blows in quick succession, a stout sword'n'board juggernaut, a precise archer whose every arrow carries death, etc. That isn't even getting into specializations or prestige classes.

In DA2 all I could do with a warrior is have a tank. This was due mostly to being stuck with weapons that were the worst in damage(having longswords and greatswords be the weakest weapons is another rant), and a talent set that didn't really compliment any other playstyle.

[Sylvius the Mad]

DA2's design seemed to assume that every party would be a traditional MMORPG party.

If that's what I wanted, I could multibox MMOs. There's a reason I'm not doing that.

[jds1bio]

I disagree that classes themselves are the problem. DA2 is set up so that if you want the best equipment at the earliest possible time, you must keep dumping points into two specific attributes. But if, for some reason, you didn't want to do this, the advantage of dumping into, say, constitution, is much less over the course of the game.

If there were ONLY classes/prestiges, and NO attributes other than what is conferred on you by class, XP/level, talent tree, and equipment, there would be a greater chance to refine the gameplay.

All attribute-point-assignment RPGs suffer from this malady, even Fallout 1/2 and The WItcher 2, though these games are good examples of games that are willing to address and handle extreme builds. It is a much more manageable system when DM'ing a group through a one-dungeon session, because attributes may not change all that much.

But for a CRPG that has a sheer number of encounters, dungeons, and scenarios, a more manageable solution would probably benefit both developer and gamer. Let's face it, we're WAY past simply putting D&D on a computer and calling it an evolution.

Modifié par jds1bio, 13 juillet 2012 - 03:31 .

[Cultist]

Attributes allow us to play various with various builds. With various weapons and various playstyles. But bringing attributes to be universal for three classes is a difficult task. We got attributes that are useless for some classes. Fallout managed it quite nice as ranged PC can choose str as it'll allow him to wear armour and use effectively heavy ranged weapons.

[Kidd]

philippe willaume wrote...

Instead of spending point in strength to get a number. You could chose ability or usage of a tool that depends of physical attribute.
Instead of using attribute to calculated game statistics they are based on the level (and the classes and race) and the attribute only gives bonus or dropping the non proficiency penalty.
 
Something along those line
If you not trained -10% to all the game statistics related to the skill or equipment used.
there could be 4 levels for each attribute. to gain acces to the next level you need to select the level below
 
Strength I
Single weapons (axe, mace, longsword)
Normal shields
Javelin
Break (door/chest simple)
Open hand combat
Powerful blow (damage +0.25% per level for single handed weapons and +0.5% for two handed weapons)
(note level is to be understood as character level.)

This sounds fantastic. And I'm not saying that only because it is similar to a PnP system I'm currently working on =)

[AkiKishi]

Fire Emblem is great for attributes. Because it's random you can't really plan on getting a particular character. Sometimes you might get a super human version , sometimes you might get a real gimp.
Of course Fire Emblem has more than enough units to not make a bad character game breaking. One change like a character not being able to double attack and kill a particular unit in one turn will require a completely rethough strategy in some cases.

The most idiot proof method is to just add stat ups to the skill trees. If you go with the 2h build you get the optimised stats for that, if you go with a tank build you get the optimised stats for that.
Nothing stops you dipping into other trees as long as there points are there (they usually are) but the game is balanced around a particular character being fully invested in a particular tree.

[Kidd]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Fire Emblem is great for attributes. Because it's random you can't really plan on getting a particular character. Sometimes you might get a super human version , sometimes you might get a real gimp.

No random in my character generation, please. The sacred cow that is rolling dice for attributes in D&D is bad enough - now that we're not using D&D, let's reap the benefits. I want full control over my PC's growth, not less - and random, at that.

[nightscrawl]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I would be more for a set-attribute system, myself, where your strength score is the same strength score the majority of the game.

That way, you would only have to worry about dealing with balanced attributes once, as opposed to every time you level up, having to pump the same old points in the same old format to give you the exact same balance/focus you would have from the beginning.

This would require removing some truly worthless attributes (I'd say probably Magic and Cunning) and then having the remaining attributes in question apply to the player throughout the whole game.

After all, the attribute numbers are totally non-sensical in both DA:O and DA2. A Warrior starts out with 20 Strength, which is good for level one, but needs to keep pumping that to get them to a 60 strength at Level 20... which is only equally as good with enemy level scaling? Wah?

If my numbers are three times higher, does that mean my character is three times stronger? No, I can't suddenly lift boulders and toss them like in a Zelda game. So it basically results in nonsense number spamming.

If we have set attributes during character creation, this allows more diverse but sustainable builds throughout the whole game.

I like this (especially that Zelda reference). But, figuring that we have these set attributes, what do you get when you level? Just a skill point? So, I hit level 10 and now I get Cone of Cold or Shield Bash, or something like that?

Also, what about stats on gear, how do those work? Let's say that as a mage your set attribute is 20 Magic; you have gear slots for chest, hands, and feet; and the best items of those type have +10 Magic each. Do you then have 50 Magic? This system would seem to be incredibly gear dependent. Or do you figure that the spells don't use those attributes as modifiers at all? If that's the case, then why have them in the game in the first place?

[AkiKishi]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Fire Emblem is great for attributes. Because it's random you can't really plan on getting a particular character. Sometimes you might get a super human version , sometimes you might get a real gimp.

No random in my character generation, please. The sacred cow that is rolling dice for attributes in D&D is bad enough - now that we're not using D&D, let's reap the benefits. I want full control over my PC's growth, not less - and random, at that.

The benefit of randomness is it forces people out of their comfort zones.

[wsandista]

BobSmith101 wrote...

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Fire Emblem is great for attributes. Because it's random you can't really plan on getting a particular character. Sometimes you might get a super human version , sometimes you might get a real gimp.

No random in my character generation, please. The sacred cow that is rolling dice for attributes in D&D is bad enough - now that we're not using D&D, let's reap the benefits. I want full control over my PC's growth, not less - and random, at that.

The benefit of randomness is it forces people out of their comfort zones.

Yes, Fire Emblem is great because of the RNG, not in spite of it.

[wsandista]

Cultist wrote...

Attributes allow us to play various with various builds. With various weapons and various playstyles. But bringing attributes to be universal for three classes is a difficult task. We got attributes that are useless for some classes. Fallout managed it quite nice as ranged PC can choose str as it'll allow him to wear armour and use effectively heavy ranged weapons.

It has been that way for almost every RPG. In NWN, if you weren't a Paladin, Cleric, Bard, or Sorcerer, Charisma was pretty much useless(yes I know it effects conversation skills, but those were not used frequently).

What could be done to make alternate attribute choices more attractive is: 1)make them effect several different stats that everyone can benefit from and/or 2)have prestige classes/specializations that utilize those attributes for certain abilities(Templar powers could use Willpower for example).

[AkiKishi]

It depends on the system. Something like SPECIAL which has relatively fixed attributes is very different from a game with attributes that increase by level.

Changing the medium from PnP to CRPG changes the value of the stats too. Con/End is far more important in PnP than it is in a CRPG for example.

[jds1bio]

BobSmith101 wrote...

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Fire Emblem is great for attributes. Because it's random you can't really plan on getting a particular character. Sometimes you might get a super human version , sometimes you might get a real gimp.

No random in my character generation, please. The sacred cow that is rolling dice for attributes in D&D is bad enough - now that we're not using D&D, let's reap the benefits. I want full control over my PC's growth, not less - and random, at that.

The benefit of randomness is it forces people out of their comfort zones.

Builds in CRPGs that can decay in effectiveness over time, like random builds and misplaced-attribute-points builds, already put me out of my comfort zone.  Yeah, I'm able to reach the endgame with them, but I'm satisfying less goals I had for myself as a player.

[Wulfram]

I believe there are some viable warrior and mage builds that are based on criticals and thus DEX. And Berserkers can definitely make good use of WIL.

Fighting the arishok with a rogue is a lot less aggravating if you take enough CON to not die with one impaling.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

It depends on the system. Something like SPECIAL which has relatively fixed attributes is very different from a game with attributes that increase by level.

Changing the medium from PnP to CRPG changes the value of the stats too. Con/End is far more important in PnP than it is in a CRPG for example.

That depends how the CRPG is designed.  In CRPGs that value strategy over tactics, Constitution/Endurance is still very important.  Also, Con/End matters quite a bit in any game where it significantly affects how many hitpoints you have.  Both DA games gave you a simply 5 HP boost from a single point of Constitution, with no levelling benefit.  Compare that to D&D, where a single point of Con might grant you as much as 25% more HP per level.  That's a huge difference.

There's no reason why a CRPG couldn't be designed in a similar way.

[AkiKishi]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

It depends on the system. Something like SPECIAL which has relatively fixed attributes is very different from a game with attributes that increase by level.

Changing the medium from PnP to CRPG changes the value of the stats too. Con/End is far more important in PnP than it is in a CRPG for example.

That depends how the CRPG is designed.  In CRPGs that value strategy over tactics, Constitution/Endurance is still very important.  Also, Con/End matters quite a bit in any game where it significantly affects how many hitpoints you have.  Both DA games gave you a simply 5 HP boost from a single point of Constitution, with no levelling benefit.  Compare that to D&D, where a single point of Con might grant you as much as 25% more HP per level.  That's a huge difference.

There's no reason why a CRPG couldn't be designed in a similar way.

You missed the point. in PnP you die, you're dead. In a CRPG you die and you reload.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

You missed the point. in PnP you die, you're dead. In a CRPG you die and you reload.

Reloading is a metagame event.  Game designs should not take it into account.

[Wulfram]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

That depends how the CRPG is designed.  In CRPGs that value strategy over tactics, Constitution/Endurance is still very important.  Also, Con/End matters quite a bit in any game where it significantly affects how many hitpoints you have.  Both DA games gave you a simply 5 HP boost from a single point of Constitution, with no levelling benefit.  Compare that to D&D, where a single point of Con might grant you as much as 25% more HP per level.  That's a huge difference.

There's no reason why a CRPG couldn't be designed in a similar way.

Applying a CON boost to HP every level makes sense if HP generally increases with level, to keep the bonus proportionate.  But it doesn't in DA2, so having it as a flat bonus makes sense.

[Sylvius the Mad]

But even so, the bonuses in DA2 were quite small compared to the entire HP pool.

To be honest, I don't even know how HP work in DA2. Because they didn't bother documenting the mechanics at all, and because I didn't actually enjoy the game (partly because they didn't document the mechanics), I didn't bother learning them.

[Provi-dance]

I'll also point out that I'd want enemies to function within and under the same attribute rules like the player character.  I don't want the DA2 aka Alice in Wonderland situation.

[Maclimes]

Provi-dance wrote...

I'll also point out that I'd want enemies to function within and under the same attribute rules like the player character.  I don't want the DA2 aka Alice in Wonderland situation.

Are you referring to the magically appearing bandits, paradropping in out of nowhere? Or a more mechanical function?

[Provi-dance]

Maclimes wrote...

Provi-dance wrote...

I'll also point out that I'd want enemies to function within and under the same attribute rules like the player character.  I don't want the DA2 aka Alice in Wonderland situation.

Are you referring to the magically appearing bandits, paradropping in out of nowhere? Or a more mechanical function?

Mechanical function.