Prime Junta
Guest
Does backtracking after every other encounter in order to be fully rested qualify as exploiting game mechanics, or does it not qualify as exploiting game mechanics?
Semantics.
It is a degenerate strategy though.
Does backtracking after every other encounter in order to be fully rested qualify as exploiting game mechanics, or does it not qualify as exploiting game mechanics?
A question to everybody:
Does backtracking after every other encounter in order to be fully rested qualify as exploiting game mechanics, or does it not qualify as exploiting game mechanics?
1. It's "degenerate gameplay" to have mobs surprise you if you sleep, because players will savescum to avoid the mobs.
2. It's "degenerate gameplay" to have to manage an inventory. It adds nothing to the gameplay. Let's let players have an unlimited inventory.
3. Players end up with a lot of cash towards the endgame because they can collect every piece of trash and sell it for one coin. We'll use the Stronghold as a money sink.
4. Although the inventory is limitless, we are limiting the amount of camping supplies players can carry so we can limit how many times they can rest before backtracking.
5. Backtracking and sleeping at an inn after every combat is also "degenerate gameplay". Yes, I know, we just incited players to play this way. But it's a bad way to play, believe me.
6. Players like to face every encounter 100% prepared and rested. Whoop-de-doo - it's how people play, we can't change that.
A question to everybody:
Does backtracking after every other encounter in order to be fully rested qualify as exploiting game mechanics, or does it not qualify as exploiting game mechanics?
All manner of strategies that use out-of-combat casting to gain extreme advantages during combat.
Yeah - to be clear, I was not talking about pre-buffing.I believe most of these fall under "unanticipated, but fun." Like the hijinks you can do with Wizard Eye for example. The boring rote casting -- pre-buffing -- is working as intended, in fact IWD encounters at least are balanced based on the assumption that players pre-buff.
Trying to answer this question on Codex is going to devolve into establishing one true definition of "exploiting", don't think I care enough to go into it. However, what's interesting here is the very thing with players having to wonder whether using some of game's basic mechanics constitutes exploiting. It's like playing Super Mario and being concerned that maybe jumping too much is breaking the game. If your players have to consider these types of questions, as a game designer you fucking failed.Does backtracking after every other encounter in order to be fully rested qualify as exploiting game mechanics, or does it not qualify as exploiting game mechanics?
Good. Actually, "exploiting game mechanics/abusing game mechanics in a way not envisioned by the designer" was my definition of a degenerate strategy, so it's not a semantics issue at all. I don't want to argue over definitions here though, as The Bishop points out.Does backtracking after every other encounter in order to be fully rested qualify as exploiting game mechanics, or does it not qualify as exploiting game mechanics?
Semantics.
It is a degenerate strategy though.
However Josh's treatment of savescumming is "we should not allow this", but when it comes to the other, he goes "that's the way some people play, let's leave them to it".
However Josh's treatment of savescumming is "we should not allow this - it's degenerate gameplay", but when it comes to the other, he goes "that's the way some people play, let's leave them to it".
How would you disallow backtracking? Honest question... I'm frequently wondering how would someone promote persistenceHowever Josh's treatment of savescumming is "we should not allow this - it's degenerate gameplay", but when it comes to the other, he goes "that's the way some people play, let's leave them to it".
That's the thing, though, the camping supplies thing would've worked to prevent save scumming if they didn't allow backtracking. The resting system would've been tremendous incline had they not designed the game around 2 hypothetical (and not so hypothetical) audiences - grognards and normies. Josh obviously wants to create a good system that isn't degenerate and fixes the issues the IE games has, but sabotages his own efforts by allowing trekking back. I don't know how Josh hasn't developed a mental disorder by now.
How would you disallow backtracking? Honest question... I'm frequently wondering how would someone promote persistence
Also, i cannot understand:
Josh said they made preset maps for random encounters in every biome, but aren't those supposed to happen only in cities and sea? Why different biomes maps then?
This one in particular I don't consider a degenerate strategy. Using memorized spells and potions you bought/found has a cost, and it's up to the player to decide if he will pay the cost.A question to everybody:
Does backtracking after every other encounter in order to be fully rested qualify as exploiting game mechanics, or does it not qualify as exploiting game mechanics?
Minor health potions and Cure light wounds x10 after every fight.
Enjoyable is subjective. As long you don't feel required to backtrack (because you can't come up with a better strategy) why shouldn't you?To me, this is the most important criteria: (2) Is rote, repetitive, boring, or otherwise unenjoyable. PoE stream-lined a lot of the tedious nonsense from the IE games. Can you trek across three or more loading screens to rest at the inn after every fight and then come back? Yes. Is there any reason to do so? In 99% of cases, fuck no. And as degenerate strategies go, it's a pretty inefficient one by comparison.
You can get off the ship and explore islands and whatnot on the world map, can't you? Or am I misremembering?
You can get off the ship and explore islands and whatnot on the world map, can't you? Or am I misremembering?
Obviously you can get off the ship, but as far as we've heard until now, world travel where you actually move your party on the world map (as opposed to just pointing and clicking on a location like PoE1's world map) is only at sea. So the assumption has been that random encounters only happen there.
Like ArtB, I'm pretty sure we've seen video in which world travel as you describe it is also done on land.Obviously you can get off the ship, but as far as we've heard until now, world travel where you actually move your party on the world map (as opposed to just pointing and clicking on a location like PoE1's world map) is only at sea. So the assumption has been that random encounters only happen there.
you can travel overland, similar to Fallout/2, and you can get random encounters during those travels.Also, i cannot understand:
Josh said they made preset maps for random encounters in every biome, but aren't those supposed to happen only in cities and sea? Why different biomes maps then?
I got "right" all of them.However Josh's treatment of savescumming is "we should not allow this", but when it comes to the other, he goes "that's the way some people play, let's leave them to it".
No, it's not. Again: he acknowledged that camping supplies failed in what he intended. He did not want players to trek back for more, but they did it anyway. That's why he revamped it for P2 (and made those other changes I don't like). That was the one bullet that you got right, remember?