28 réponses à ce sujet

[StElmo]

Obviously, your going to have to fight enemies at some point, but I think it would be cool if there was a skill/perk that allowed you to reason with/talk down rational enemies like small groups of bandit raiders and the like?

Heck, it would be awesome if you could avoid a whole battle, (ostagar-like situation) if your sharp tongue was good enough.

Does anyone else think it would be cool to put a lot of weight on conversations as a method of power, rather than just a method of choice?

Anyway, can't wait for the game either way, looks pretty damn solid

[Paul E Dangerously]

My problem with this is that it gets to be pretty overpowered with respect to talking down damn near anyone. Take DAO's Persuasion, or Fallout New Vegas' speech skills.

[Nerdage]

If they could get rid of xp on kills then great, smooth-talking your way out of bad situations can be good fun and occasionally hilarious, but if I end up under-leveled later on as a result then it probably shouldn't be there.

[Tinxa]

I agree.

I really hated that in DA2. Even the most innocent looking quest ended in bloodshed for some reason. You could never reason with the scared mages it was always "blargh abomination!". I was really surprised when a group of templars didn't barge in and forced me to kill them during Emile DeLauncets quest.

[Rolling Flame]

nerdage wrote...

If they could get rid of xp on kills then great, smooth-talking your way out of bad situations can be good fun and occasionally hilarious, but if I end up under-leveled later on as a result then it probably shouldn't be there.

Alternatively, they could simply work out how much XP one would get if you choose to fight, and give a similar amount if you or a party member talk your way out of it.

[andar91]

I absolutely want more options to resolve a quest or dilemma than just fighting my way through. It doesn't have to be for every single one, but if felt like your response to EVERYTHING in DA2 was simply fighting. It would be nice if XP was tied to the task or encounter instead of per-kill; you could fight the bandits, convince them to leave you alone, or even sneak around them. Either way, you've gotten past them...200 XP!

[Fast Jimmy]

I think a persuasion/speech skill would be great.

Then again, how can you talk down Darkspawn, dragons and war nugs? They don't talk, after all.

In addition, there would need to be some type of way of handling it so you wouldn't just choose the speech skill dialogue option every time it appeared as a way to get the best rewards, outcomes and reactions. That would be what has been coined as an "Auto-Win Button."

Maybe a type of system where using Persuasion means entering into some type of bargain? Give 10 gold, or open the gates to a nearby village for the enemy to attack, or kill another group and the enemy will let you pass. The problem with that, conversely, is that it makes it the best move to drop the difficulty down to Casual and then kill the harder enemy, getting the best outcomes. Which is why non-combat skills and scalable combat difficulty don't always make good bedfellows.

[nightcobra]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I think a persuasion/speech skill would be great.

Then again, how can you talk down Darkspawn, dragons and war nugs? They don't talk, after all.

In addition, there would need to be some type of way of handling it so you wouldn't just choose the speech skill dialogue option every time it appeared as a way to get the best rewards, outcomes and reactions. That would be what has been coined as an "Auto-Win Button."

Maybe a type of system where using Persuasion means entering into some type of bargain? Give 10 gold, or open the gates to a nearby village for the enemy to attack, or kill another group and the enemy will let you pass. The problem with that, conversely, is that it makes it the best move to drop the difficulty down to Casual and then kill the harder enemy, getting the best outcomes. Which is why non-combat skills and scalable combat difficulty don't always make good bedfellows.

maybe rather than a persuasion skill, a diplomatic skill could be more in tune with a leader's role and it could be a way of initiating a dialogue battle (more or less like deus ex) in which being more skilled in diplomacy allows you to better read the opposing character's mood/expectations towards your argument.

[Magdalena11]

I hope they do bring back some form of persuasion/coercion.I loved the talent section of DAO and felt it added a lot to the RP. Even in DA2 there were a couple fights you could talk your way out of. Consider having Varric lie to the templars in Act of Mercy, choosing diplomatic options when Lilley was killed in Inside Job, having Varric talk down the slaver in Wayward Son and most significantly taking responsibility at the end of A New Path. Granted, those options resulted in less experience but it wasn't that big a hit. I saw the point in the nighttime gangs but not the endless waves, which Bioware has already said won't be making a comeback.

[StElmo]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I think a persuasion/speech skill would be great.

Then again, how can you talk down Darkspawn, dragons and war nugs? They don't talk, after all.
 

Yeah, hence why I said rational enemies.

[Illyria]

I think it would be interesting if this was tied to class/race. So playing an elven mage might lead to a different result in a quest from playing a human mage, and a radically different result from playing a non-mage (just as an example).

[TribolMan]

Sopa de Gato wrote...

My problem with this is that it gets to be pretty overpowered with respect to talking down damn near anyone. Take DAO's Persuasion, or Fallout New Vegas' speech skills.

In Fallout NV you could talk down even the final boss of the game if you had max speech skill

[Jorji Costava]

I think this is a really good idea; it's one that we've seen in games like Planescape: Torment and Arcanum (although I admittedly couldn't get into the latter game too much), among others. Here are some inadequately thought-out ideas about how it might be 'balanced':

First, don't make persuasion too simple: Don't always make it a matter of "If your persuasion skill is high enough, you get access to the 'win encounter' button, and if it isn't, you don't." I don't have any fleshed ideas about how to implement an alternative, but perhaps something somewhat similar to DX:HR's CASIE augmentation might be nice, where if your skill is high, you get access to certain information about the NPC's nervousness, what kind of personality types they're most receptive to, etc.

The point is, make some of these conversations something you have a non-trivial chance of losing (and not just because your persuasion score was 2 instead of 3, making the required conversation option greyed out), and have at least one of the functions of persuasion be to give you a better chance of not doing so, by enabling you to make better-informed decisions about what to say. There's a general assumption that dialogue is somehow not as legitimate an aspect of RPG gameplay as combat, and I like to see games implement novel mechanics that challenge this assumption.

Second, the costs and benefits of using persuasion to avoid an encounter versus fighting it out should largely be determined in in-universe, roleplaying terms. That is, your decision to persuade or fight (or run, sneak, etc.) should be determined not by considerations like "How much XP will this get me?" or "How many resources will I use by fighting rather than conversing?", but by considerations like, "Will I get a reputation for being a violent thug?", or "Will people start thinking of my character things like, 'You can't trust that fast-talking SOB?'" Those aren't great examples, but they get at the general idea I want to gesture at here, which is that the costs and benefits of choosing to fight rather than persuade or vice versa should be felt by the PC more than by the player.

[Nerdage]

Rolling Flame wrote...

nerdage wrote...

If they could get rid of xp on kills then great, smooth-talking your way out of bad situations can be good fun and occasionally hilarious, but if I end up under-leveled later on as a result then it probably shouldn't be there.

Alternatively, they could simply work out how much XP one would get if you choose to fight, and give a similar amount if you or a party member talk your way out of it.

It would work, but it seems like unnecessary extra work when it could just be removed. Plus, what if I then want to sneak past an encounter? Or sneak past and then come back later and kill everyone? (I'm still hoping MotA was a prototype for some proper stealth mechanics)

Only giving xp for achieving things like quest objectives leaves it up to the player how they actually achieve them, but giving xp for kills/coercion/etc means that you can only really play the ways the game explicitly rewards. Plus, someone has to actually sit down and work out what enemies are worth how much xp; how and when to give the player that xp for each of the different 'victory' conditions (kills/coercion/etc); make sure different paths in the same quest give roughly the same xp, even when one might have more [combat/coercion/etc] than another; etc., rather than just being able to say "this quest is worth this much xp" and having that be it.

[Phate Phoenix]

nerdage wrote...

Only giving xp for achieving things like quest objectives leaves it up to the player how they actually achieve them, but giving xp for kills/coercion/etc means that you can only really play the ways the game explicitly rewards. Plus, someone has to actually sit down and work out what enemies are worth how much xp; how and when to give the player that xp for each of the different 'victory' conditions (kills/coercion/etc); make sure different paths in the same quest give roughly the same xp, even when one might have more [combat/coercion/etc] than another; etc., rather than just being able to say "this quest is worth this much xp" and having that be it.

Oh, I like this idea. In a game where level grinding just isn't possible, I think having EXP tied to enemies is unnecessary and limiting to rollplaying, especially when the game is very dependent on player decisions. Maybe each quest is broken into segments, and each segment is worth so much EXP, so that the player experiences a constant growth throughout the adventure instead of just getting a lump at the end. That way you can level up before, say, a boss or a large battle. (And we avoid a "MISSION COMPLETE" screen.)

Getting back on topic, I love being able to talk my way out of things. It's my favorite gameplay mechanic ever. Generally, it's how I build my first character in any game. I think, perhaps, the kind of speech skill you have could influence a battle? Specifically, I'm thinking of an intimidate-type skill, where you can actually scare off some weaker-willed enemies, either before and whilst in a battle.

That's the only one I can think of for a in-the-midst-of-fighing skill. Persuasion might be a bit too late at this point, as with lying. (Although, if DAI were a bit more cartoony, an "OMG OVER THERE" would be a funny addition. Not something I'd like to see in this game, though.) Perhaps that could be the trade off: out of fights, Persuasion and Lying avoid the fight altogether, Intimidation can sometimes trigger fights, but they would be easier because you scared off some opponents. In a fight, Persuasion and Lying are not helpful while Intimidation can be.

For Persuasion and Lying, maybe Persuasion is the just out-and-out the safe bet: you tell them the truth, you avoid the fight, and nothing else happens. However, if you Lie, maybe you can get something out of it (say, an item), but it can come back and bite you on the butt, like a stronger encounter later on if you get caught in it from future conversations. Intimidation might just make someone angry and cause a fight anyway but, like I said above, maybe at an easier level.

Sorry for the word vomit, my brain wouldn't shut off.

[StElmo]

I also like the idea that completing quests gives XP, but in practice it might be another story. Stat balancing is so tricky, we have to understand that.

Modifié par StElmo, 27 août 2013 - 09:11 .

[DooomCookie]

I really missed the whole skills feature in DA2. It felt really old-school RPG in DAO sort of tweaking your character as you will.

[Parmida]

TribolMan wrote...

Sopa de Gato wrote...

My problem with this is that it gets to be pretty overpowered with respect to talking down damn near anyone. Take DAO's Persuasion, or Fallout New Vegas' speech skills.

In Fallout NV you could talk down even the final boss of the game if you had max speech skill

Ahhh...FO:NV has the best dialogue options. I feel like a badass with a golden tongue playing that game. I took what I wanted, NOBODY messes with me! 

[Rawgrim]

It would be cool if, say some of the companions had diplomatic skills, could take care of certain encounters as well.

[Ieldra]

Rolling Flame wrote...

nerdage wrote...
If they could get rid of xp on kills then great, smooth-talking your way out of bad situations can be good fun and occasionally hilarious, but if I end up under-leveled later on as a result then it probably shouldn't be there.

Alternatively, they could simply work out how much XP one would get if you choose to fight, and give a similar amount if you or a party member talk your way out of it.

A smaller amount? Why that?

I recall the way Fallout 1 surprised me when it gave me 1000 xp for sneaking down to the lowest level of the Military Base without being seen. That was a defining moment of my existence as a gamer, I've always wanted more of that - and no game but the Fallouts ever gave it to me.

Or they could just give xp for completed quests like in ME2, regardless of how you completed them. I liked that (only there was no nother solution but to fight so it didn't matter in the end). "Enemy maximizing" shouldn't be a viable leveling strategy. Rather, enemy minimizing while still completing the mission should result in bigger rewards. In any remotely realistic setting, nobody ever routinely seeks out more things to fight.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 27 août 2013 - 01:58 .

[Kalas Magnus]

I support this.
It can add to the replay value.

I play video games for the combat so i dont care if you take the easy way out.
Ive been playing fallout new vegas recently and love the fact that i can engage almost everything in combat.
If you're not into that it is ok.
Although I think that the choice should reflect in the gameplay though. Like I should get better and stronger abilities. Or enemies will run away on sight.

Modifié par Kalas Magnus, 27 août 2013 - 02:19 .

[MKDAWUSS]

And we'd have to filibuster the boss.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

Yes..I would like to have a speech / persuasion skill or stat or attribute or perk tree...

My primary character is a mage. A very intelligent and rational mage. It seems such a shame to not being able to calm things down rationally and talk about instead of just fighting. I mean my mage loves using crushing prison on fiends but he does not like to waste mana and spells unnecessarily.

[Aurora313]

A dialogue is a battle in its own way. I'd love to see it.

[TheKomandorShepard]

I loved how my warden could lie leliana with "I didn't slept with Morrigan" and she believed