Editorial Josh Sawyer Explains: How to Balance an RPG

[Delterius]

I'd imagine even a wizard needs to be physically fit to be able to tolerate the strain of spellcasting on their bodies. Casting powerful illusions or fireballs Id' imaging would strain their bodies.

Course I'm talking more about stamina, but still.

Then again, fitness isn't portrayed by MIG but rather CON. If you want to make a character who's physically fit for his size or if PoE's world did involve some sort of bodily strain in spellcasting then you'd consider giving them a high constitution.

On the other hand, the story that is told via MIG is that Wizards with powerful magic tend to have powerful bodies as well, they'll be able to "outright physically bully and intimidate. E.g. picking people up, smashing things, imposing themselves" in scripted interactions. They are also supposed to be able to carry more items in the party pack. The inverse is also true, most any bloke probably has a stronger soul for the purposes of casting searing fireballs than a 'classic mage'.

On my part this is not a deal breaker but it is weird. Sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't have been wiser to balance the game for fewer classes that often use attributes in different ways.

 

[Zetor]

I don't really mind the 'soul power' idea. It reminds me of the Secret World for some reason, where your attacks were all based on 'anima', and the machinegun / katana / hammer / shotgun / rocket launcher / etc you wielded was just the focus for giving the power form and wasn't actually firing physical bullets / inflicting physical damage at all.

Also,

Spoiler

 

[HiddenX]

Sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't have been wiser to balance the game for fewer classes that often use attributes in different ways.

Josh should have stayed true to his dream and made a game with no classes at all. They should NOT have marketed the game as IE games successor.
Maybe with a stat-skill system closer to GURPS/Fallout.

They are getting flak from everywhere because they are selling a game as an IE successor that in the game-mechanics feels really different.

 

[mastroego]

To me, this Might issue and all the other nonsense feels more like a case of too many Yes-Men not having the balls to tell the Overlord that he's come up with a retarded idea.
So they all put a nice smile on their faces and the idiocy finds its way unchallenged to the final product.

By then, all manners of admittedly creative "interpretations" have been spawned in the attempt to fool the audience about what really happened.

 

[Dreaad]

To me, this Might issue and all the other nonsense feels more like a case of too many Yes-Men not having the balls to tell the Overlord that he's come up with a retarded idea.
So they all put a nice smile on their faces and the idiocy finds its way unchallenged to the final product.

By then, all manners of admittedly creative "interpretations" have been spawned in the attempt to fool the audience about what really happened.

Yeah this whole thing reminds me of George Lucas. God forbid the mighty lord of film making ever take any advice from any fans/backers/friends/proven franchises etc.He is the master much like Sawyer and knows what he is doing. Only when the thing is finally released and bombs due to weird mechanics, too fast combat, terrible voice acting, rtwp for no apparent reason and most probably the ever famous obsidian bugs. Then he will say it was made for grognards living in the past so you can blame them.

 

[SCO]

I love simulationist butthurt in the morning.

 

[Blaine]

 

[mastroego]

I love simulationist butthurt in the morning.

A "simulationist" I assume likes rules for every little detail.
We're not talking rules' quantity but quality.
I can have just a few rules as long as they make SENSE

Also no butthurt, I didn't back this project after all, just having a little fun seeing modern "design philosophies" trying too hard to innovate for the sake of it

 

[Ninjerk]

I love simulationist butthurt in the morning.

A "simulationist" I assume likes rules for every little detail.
We're not talking rules' quantity but quality.
I can have just a few rules as long as they make SENSE

Also no butthurt, I didn't back this project after all, just having a little fun seeing modern "design philosophies" trying too hard to innovate for the sake of it

A simulationist doesn't just want a rule for every detail, but more specifically ones that try to replicate something approaching realism (or verisimilitude when supernatural elements or sufficiently advanced technology are introduced). Hence complaints about the "Might" stat.

 

[SymbolicFrank]

Even the combat is better in Planescape: Torment.

/thread

 

[Servo]

I think maybe Sawyer equates winning with fun. To me, fun is having lots of options to try out and discovering for myself which are good and which are bad...










...while drunk.

 

[Whisper]

Now, I haven't played the PoE beta. But I've seen the attribute screens which already pretty clearly underline a problem with the game's system.

It's not about whether the stats are competitive vs. each other, or significant enough to alter your playstyle - those numbers can be easily tweaked to reach a reasonable balance.

It's just the core concept that's iffy. Basically you've got Damage Dealing stat, AoE/duration stat, HP stat, Accuracy stat, and so on. These could really be named anything and the description text could say anything, in their core they're still just that. Which is kinda ok from a mechanic perspective, I suppose, but thematically the attributes presented don't really let you realize different character concepts you might have. Does a PoE mage with high Might really feel like a muscular dude? Or just a mage who has high damage spells? Basically the stats feel like very different things depending on which class they're given to.

D&D is simplistic and in some ways just bad, sure, but at least it tells us some things - warriors are strong and tough, and mages are smart, as a rule. Which gives a thematic background into what kind of people would pick which profession. PoE tells us that any kind of person is fit for any profession, only thing that varies is their exact combat role. ToEE implementation (the point buy side of it) was p. good all in all, you had real choices to make. The BG/IWD method was p. pointless of course.

in Dark Eye system - mages needed some non-mage stats like Str and Dex to be high for some good spells to be effective. Brilliant solution.

Check Blackguards, for example.

 

[Zeriel]

I think maybe Sawyer equates winning with fun. To me, fun is having lots of options to try out and discovering for myself which are good and which are bad...










...while drunk.

Yeah, he basically seems to submit to the idea that players have the most fun when they progress through the game without any major roadblocks. Personally, I find the most fun is in figuring out how to get to that point with a game, not being there automatically.

 

[Lhynn]

"I can't overstate how completely evil complexity is, especially in a sandbox game," he said. "Constantly ask yourself: What can I remove from the game?"

Who is the asshole that wrote that?

 

[Zeriel]

"I can't overstate how completely evil complexity is, especially in a sandbox game," he said. "Constantly ask yourself: What can I remove from the game?"

Who is the asshole that wrote that?

Simcity lead developer.

 

[Lhynn]

"I can't overstate how completely evil complexity is, especially in a sandbox game," he said. "Constantly ask yourself: What can I remove from the game?"

Who is the asshole that wrote that?

Simcity lead developer.

I honestly hope he got fired after saying that, but knowing EA, that didnt happen.

 

[Delterius]

"I can't overstate how completely evil complexity is, especially in a sandbox game," he said. "Constantly ask yourself: What can I remove from the game?"

Who is the asshole that wrote that?

Simcity lead developer.

Its like the emblematic phrase that summarizes a disaster.

- We needed creative solutions to the semitic complexity. Hitler on a parallel nuremberg trials.

 

[Roguey]

Yeah, he basically seems to submit to the idea that players have the most fun when they progress through the game without any major roadblocks. Personally, I find the most fun is in figuring out how to get to that point with a game, not being there automatically.

Additionally, players typically respond well to difficulty that moves on a "rollercoaster" over the course of the game. If a single weapon or set of weapons allows the player to crest and effectively coast through rest of the game, it's often a less enjoyable experience.

How high that rollercoaster goes will vary depending on the audience.