1120 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

Random? Wizard defense spells are in the manual, aren't they?

 

Speaking as someone unfamiliar with D&D, the fact that this particular wizard was, for example, all based around horror and petrify spells while this other wizard was all about the fireballs and lightning strike was pretty random. 

 

I don't remember BG2 the way you do. Except for a handful of boss fights that you know are coming-- the dragons, Kangaxx, a few others -- you could get through just fine with a standard spell loadout.

 

It takes a while to learn which spells are general utility (e.g. that horror is a great spell early on, sleep is OK early on, identify shouldn't be something you have in your spell book except if you're resting in a safe place to avoid paying merchants, etc.).  

[In Exile]

They've gone on and on about how important exploration is in this game.  Do they think exploration is just wandering around?

 

I think so. Certainly all they have talked about in terms of exploration is (1) finding locations and (2) wandering around big areas. 

 

I agree with you that an element of strategy is a particular set of talent load-outs to trigger an encounter on favourable terms (e.g. for BG1 it would be scout while stealthed, cast horror as a surprise, charm person a tough melee fighter, rush in with your melee warriors, then maybe spam magic missle).  But I don't think DA:I is going to be doing it this way. 

[Eterna]

I say good, only 8 ability slots forces the player to actually specialize their character for a specific role instead of the old days where a mage could do everything in thr bloody game.

 

Now you pick what your character does, set up a load out and let your party members fill the other role. 

[AlanC9]

You've never misclicked something?

Often. But I haven't often failed to notice that I've misclicked. Any empty slots will be quite visible on your screen.
 

If I'm exploring, I might want different abilities handy.  I might have accidentally removed some things while rearranging icons and haven't gotten around to fixing it yet (this happened all the time in DAO, but DAO let me repopulate the hotbar during combat, or cast spells straight from the talent page).

If you know that the game won't let you reshuffle abilities in combat and nevertheless leave problems in place until you get around to fixing them, anything that goes wrong while exploring is your own damn fault.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I agree with you that an element of strategy is a particular set of talent load-outs to trigger an encounter on favourable terms (e.g. for BG1 it would be scout while stealthed, cast horror as a surprise, charm person a tough melee fighter, rush in with your melee warriors, then maybe spam magic missle).  But I don't think DA:I is going to be doing it this way. 

I just don't understand how anyone can think that's good design.

 

If I fight Red Templars 12 times with the same party, how many different ways can I defeat them?  Ideally, the answer should be 12.

[In Exile]

I say good, only 8 ability slots forces the player to actually specialize their character for a specific role instead of the old days where a mage could do everything in thr bloody game.

 

Now you pick what your character does, set up a load out and let your party members fill the other role. 

 

The problem is that 8 abilities are generally enough to get all the really great OP ones, but not enough to pick other things that are more fun to experiment with during an encounter you're dominating. 

 

Maybe Bioware fixed their design problems with combat balance. But if they didn't then 8 ability limits will reduce the variety of abilities as wasting a slot on a crap spell isn't worth it anymore even for the novelty factor unless you want to gimp yourself.  

[Sylvius the Mad]

Often. But I haven't often failed to notice that I've misclicked. Any empty slots will be quite visible on your screen.
 
If you know that the game won't let you reshuffle abilities in combat and nevertheless leave problems in place until you get around to fixing them, anything that goes wrong while exploring is your own damn fault.

So my absent-minded character gets killed because of a metagame restriction?

 

Or am I just not allowed to roleplay when exploring?

[spacediscosaurus]

I do.  Well, most of them.

 

I'd like gear to have both mass and volume.  I'd like cooldowns explained.  I don't care about the damage issue because this isn't real life - it's a fictional setting with its own rules.  As long as those rules are applied consistently (which means no gameplay/lore segregation), I'm fine.

 

I'm honestly quite curious about this. Have you found any games that don't have gameplay/lore segregation? In my experience, by virtue of being a game, gameplay always have some form of contradiction with the rules of the setting.

[In Exile]

So my absent-minded character gets killed because of a metagame restriction?

 

Or am I just not allowed to roleplay when exploring?

 

You're allowed to do it in the sense that you can do it, but developers do not seem that interested in supporting this style - and really never seemed that interested in doing it. 

[spacediscosaurus]

So my absent-minded character gets killed because of a metagame restriction?

 

Or am I just not allowed to roleplay when exploring?

 

...what? Your character isn't the one who messed up and decided not to fix the problem, you are. Unless you roleplay your characters as having fourth wall-breaking knowledge of the UI, which, while creative, isn't what I'd consider usual for most players...

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'm honestly quite curious about this. Have you found any games that don't have gameplay/lore segregation? In my experience, by virtue of being a game, gameplay always have some form of contradiction with the rules of the setting.

I don't think roleplaying games are games.  I think they're toys, because roleplaying games don't have winning conditions.

 

And yes.  Many tabletop games operate as simulations.  Older CRPGs tended to deviate from that only as required by the limitations of the medium, but not ever as a design goal.

 

Now, designing decent gameplay alongside your lore takes more playtesting, which is why I encourage developers to use established rulesets (or just make one and stick with it, which I had hoped they'd do with Dragon Age, but they change it radically from game to game for no reason I can understand).

[Sylvius the Mad]

...what? Your character isn't the one who messed up and decided not to fix the problem, you are. Unless you roleplay your characters as having fourth wall-breaking knowledge of the UI, which, while creative, isn't what I'd consider usual for most players...

That's an important question.  What is my character's knowledge of the UI and its limitations?  Why does he think he only has access to 8 of his abilities?

 

I think these questions need answers, because they'll inform how I play.  For example, I don't like that the game pauses automatically when I'm managing my inventory.  Time should pass when I'm doing that, to encourage me to do it only when I'm somewhere safe (they could have done the same thing with the hotbar, by the way - instead of prohibiting in-combat swapping, just don't let us pause to do it).  So if ability swapping is something of which my character is aware (which he should be - I mean, he'd notice that he can't case Fireball some of the time, right?), what's his explanation?

[PsychoBlonde]

It's not at all unusual in tabletop games, which is usually my basis for comparison.

 

I'm calling foul on this.  I have yet to meet a Wizard who could use EVERY spell he knew in the SAME combat.  This is WILDLY variable based on system.  There are also a huge number of tabletop systems that don't have classes.  Which implies what, exactly?

Every gaming system is its own animal as far as this kind of thing goes.

[spacediscosaurus]

I don't think roleplaying games are games.  I think they're toys, because roleplaying games don't have winning conditions.

 

And yes.  Many tabletop games operate as simulations.  Older CRPGs tended to deviate from that only as required by the limitations of the medium, but not ever as a design goal.

 

But we're talking about video games here, which have limitations because of programming. Tabletop games have the luxury of being able to adjust to player decisions. That's why you're not free to just do whatever you want in the world in video games. It would be impossible to account for every thing a player wants to do.

[Sylvius the Mad]

But we're talking about video games here, which have limitations because of programming. Tabletop games have the luxury of being able to adjust to player decisions. That's why you're not free to just do whatever you want in the world in video games. It would be impossible to account for every thing a player wants to do.

We're not talking about being able to do anything.  We're talking about being able to do the things that are possible in that game setting.  And casting Fireball is something that is possible in Dragon Age.

 

Except when you don't have it on your hotbar.  What?

[spacediscosaurus]

That's an important question.  What is my character's knowledge of the UI and its limitations?  Why does he think he only has access to 8 of his abilities?

 

I think these questions need answers, because they'll inform how I play.  For example, I don't like that the game pauses automatically when I'm managing my inventory.  Time should pass when I'm doing that, to encourage me to do it only when I'm somewhere safe (they could have done the same thing with the hotbar, by the way - instead of prohibiting in-combat swapping, just don't let us pause to do it).  So if ability swapping is something of which my character is aware (which he should be - I mean, he'd notice that he can't case Fireball some of the time, right?), what's his explanation?

 

There are no answers. It's a game. If you enjoy the freedom of tabletop gaming so much, instead of attempting to rationalize video game mechanics, why not just stick to tabletop gaming? CRPGs have never been a true emulation of the tabletop experience, and I don't see it ever being possible to really replicate it.

 

In regards to you disliking the game pausing when managing inventory, shouldn't you also object to being able to pause combat to issue orders?

[Zu Long]

So my absent-minded character gets killed because of a metagame restriction?

 

Or am I just not allowed to roleplay when exploring?

 

If your absent minded character dies while forgetting important things that keep them alive, isn't that good roleplaying? Leaving your sword outside the door due to absent mindedness would accomplish the same thing.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'm calling foul on this.  I have yet to meet a Wizard who could use EVERY spell he knew in the SAME combat.

Low-level or low-intelligence wizards could do this routinely.

This is WILDLY variable based on system.  There are also a huge number of tabletop systems that don't have classes.  Which implies what, exactly?

It implies nothing.  The class-based nature of the game isn't relevant here.  A classless system with an 8 ability restriction would require similar justification.

 

Now, if the characters could only learn 8 abilities ever, this UI would make perfect sense.

Every gaming system is its own animal as far as this kind of thing goes.

Yes, but tabletop systems tend to be more simulationist, so their rules are consistent with their settings.  Paranoia was always a fun one to wrap your head around.

[PsychoBlonde]

Well at least now you can flee /disengage from fights...

So yeah in case things turns sour , and you don't have the right spells in your quickback , you run away , redo your quickbar , re engage the fight.

 

IMHO that's not strategy , it's just a waste of everyone's time but whatever.

 

No, it's not strategy.  That's a *tactical* decision.

Strategy describes the overall approach.  Tactics is what you do in the field.  So strategy would be along the lines of: "I found that if I combo these abilities across my characters with this gear and these items, I can handle pretty much anything.  I find that a lot of fun.  If I have to disengage because I was wrong (or reload, which is annoying), well, that's all part of the learning experience.  It's not a waste of time if you learn something.  Or are you just saying that you should auto-conquer every single fight on the first try?  Why is running away and trying again somehow inherently more of a "waste of time" than having to wait through the death animation and re-load the game?  I find the latter MUCH more annoying.

 

Plus sometimes you can get your enemies to chase you over cliffs or into traps or similar.  And that's always AWESOME. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

There are no answers. It's a game. If you enjoy the freedom of tabletop gaming so much, instead of attempting to rationalize video game mechanics, why not just stick to tabletop gaming? CRPGs have never been a true emulation of the tabletop experience, and I don't see it ever being possible to really replicate it.

Because a CRPG gives me a chance to roleplay without the need for other players.  I like single-player games, which tabletop games are not.  That they are immutably multiplayer is what is wrong with them.

 

And I suppose CRPGs are, too, in a way, as I'm playing with the developers, but they're not here when I do it.

In regards to you disliking the game pausing when managing inventory, shouldn't you also object to being able to pause combat to issue orders?

No, because that's something that isn't happening in the game world.  Me moving my mouse around shouldn't affect the in-game events.  If the game doesn't pause then, it becomes a test of my mouse control, and that doesn't make any sense in the setting.

 

To some degree, that's also true of inventory, but digging through packs is actually something the characters do.  Ultima VIII handled this really well - your backpack was a small UI element into which you dropped icons for your gear.  And they sat there, overlapping.  If your bag got too full, you had trouble finding things.  If you kept it neat, finding things was easy.

[PsychoBlonde]

Low-level or low-intelligence wizards could do this routinely.

 

No, because even a brand-new newbie wizard with an 11 int (the minimum to cast 1st-level spells) knows 9 first-level spells and can cast ONE.

 

But keep on spouting off about unrelated things that have no bearing on each other.   You do that all the time anyway.

[AlanC9]

Speaking as someone unfamiliar with D&D, the fact that this particular wizard was, for example, all based around horror and petrify spells while this other wizard was all about the fireballs and lightning strike was pretty random. 

Oh, I see. I thought you were talking about the wizards' defenses against your party's attacks, not the other way around. In practice it's best to not worry about the enemies' specific spell lists. Just assume you're going to get Chaos tossed at you since that one can ruin your whole day, get everyone's saves up, and maybe fire resistance. Most of the defensive spells aren't worth it since they don't have enough duration.
 

It takes a while to learn which spells are general utility (e.g. that horror is a great spell early on, sleep is OK early on, identify shouldn't be something you have in your spell book except if you're resting in a safe place to avoid paying merchants, etc.).

Sure, there's a bit of a learning curve, though a lot of that can be done just by reading the rules and thinking a bit.

[Sylvius the Mad]

If your absent minded character dies while forgetting important things that keep them alive, isn't that good roleplaying? Leaving your sword outside the door due to absent mindedness would accomplish the same thing.

Yes.  Does that mean the 8 ability limit is an in-setting reality?

 

That's what I'm asking.  Should my character be aware of the limit?

[AresKeith]

There are no answers. It's a game. If you enjoy the freedom of tabletop gaming so much, instead of attempting to rationalize video game mechanics, why not just stick to tabletop gaming? CRPGs have never been a true emulation of the tabletop experience, and I don't see it ever being possible to really replicate it.

 

In regards to you disliking the game pausing when managing inventory, shouldn't you also object to being able to pause combat to issue orders?

 

This argument with him will just go in circles

[PsychoBlonde]

Because a CRPG gives me a chance to roleplay without the need for other players.  I like single-player games, which tabletop games are not.  That they are immutably multiplayer is what is wrong with them.

Sylvius' idea of "playing a game" actually translates to "writing a novel that somehow involves die rolls".  Limitations, other people . . . all these interfere with the expression of pure imagination that (somehow) "should be" gaming.

Or, more accurately, he wants to write a novel without having any notion of what's going to happen--but also somehow without having anyone else supply that information, because that implies a ton of "limitations".