Baldur's Gate PoE vs IE: Do wizards need to have more stuff to do in combat? DISCUSS!

[ZagorTeNej]

I guess he didn't think the stats were that important to the Baldur's Gate experience. They are, after all, just something you set at chargen and then basically forget about it for the rest of the game. They don't even increase on level up occasionally like in 3rd Edition.

As a consequence of it being a low level D&D adventure, stats (well some of them atleast) were pretty damn important in first BG, 18 DEX (+4 to armor class) was a life saver in many situations regardless of the class, 18/** STR and 18 CON were very important for a fighter and greatly increased his chance of survival etc.

It's in the sequel that stats took a backseat because of a much high level cap and an abundance of stat increasing items (heck you could find/buy an 18 CHA ring and 19 STR belt in the first few hours of the game).

 

[Infinitron]

I guess he didn't think the stats were that important to the Baldur's Gate experience. They are, after all, just something you set at chargen and then basically forget about it for the rest of the game. They don't even increase on level up occasionally like in 3rd Edition.

As a consequence of it being a low level D&D adventure, stats (well some of them atleast) were pretty damn important in first BG, 18 DEX (+4 to armor class) was a life saver in many situations regardless of the class, 18/** STR and 18 CON were very important for a fighter and greatly increased his chance of survival etc.

It's in the sequel that stats took a backseat because of a much high level cap and an abundance of stat increasing items (heck you could find/buy an 18 CHA ring and 19 STR belt in the first few hours of the game).

Sure, I'm not saying they didn't have an effect, but they weren't something you really had to fuck around with regularly, so the exact details of how they affected your character weren't that important to the Infinity Engine Gameplay Experience(tm).

 

[Volourn]

Youa re an idiot.

 

[DraQ]

Good point. I didn't notice the middle ground of secondary stats between primary stats and dump stats.

For example you could have every class have primary attributes that would be set to certain minimal value required for that class to function well during chargen and disallow player reducing them below that.

Then you'd have choice how to allocate the rest of your points, for example with wizard it might mean choosing between straight wizardly build and something along the line of battlemage, not as good at straight casting but capable of using better weapons and armour, capable of hitting better (for status effects) and capable of going closer to the action for touch and other short range magic.

Or you might set up your system so that player will have some surplus points even after optimizing their build in regards to primary stat of given class, and then be able to distribute remaining points between remaining stats, guilt free, and choose whether their mage is going to be more of a charismatic sage, sneaky nightblade type (if you excuse TES nomenclature) or battlemage with both arcane power and trusty zweihander.

Dump stats are bad and sympthomatic of a failure of a system, but lack of dump stats merely means that no class finds any of the attributes useless, relatively useless or useless above certain threshold. It doesn't mean that classes can't have their primary attributes or minimal required stat values.

Mangoose There were never two different stats for determining physical damage and magic damage in Pillars of Eternity. The stat was changed from Intellect to Might at one point, though.

Whut, so before Intellect affected Physical Damage? lol.

It's far less retarded than might affecting magical one.

I mean, you can make a case for intelligent fighter to be able to launch more devastating attacks by exploiting enemy weakness, forcing them to expose themselves and striking weak spots, but what case can you make for muscle wizard doing more damage with his fireball?
Does he cast more fist or something?

What's wrong with your face?

Sure, it would be better to not have one-size-fits-all solution for things as different as swordfighting and wizardry, but at least intellect can be argued to make sense when regulating effectiveness of attacks in general (AKA damage).
Strength just fucking doesn't.

I don't think you understand what cargo cult means.

Sure I do.

Copying something or some aspect of it without actually understanding the why of it.

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

I guess he didn't think the stats were that important to the Baldur's Gate experience. They are, after all, just something you set at chargen and then forget about it for the rest of the game.

So there were no stat affecting items or potions in the game? So stats didn't influence how your character would perform?

Of course they did, but it's not like, say, Fallout, where maintaining your character sheet by spending skill points was a constant occupation.

Well, Fallout didn't have you altering your main attribute points on level up either. Are we talking about attribute points or skill points? If it's just about having more abilities or SKILL points to spend on level up, then we're in agreement that BG needs some improvement, but as far as the attributes themselves go, they were largely fine as they were.

You picked a class, rolled up some stats, and then did what your class was supposed to do - melee things if you were a fighter, cast spells if you were a mage, etc.

And you never used potions to bump your strength or constitution to 18 or higher? You never wore any bracers to enhance your dexterity? Any belts to give you fire giant strength? No one ever tried to trick you into putting on a cursed ring that robbed you of your intellect? Your ability scores were never drained by any enemies or spells? You never cast a spell to alter your base AC, hitpoints, CHA or THAC0 (all of which were determined largely by your ability scores)?

tl;dr: Attributes were always a big part of the game, you just rarely got the chance to munchkin level them up.

Granted there were some broken things (being able to lower your fighter's INT to 3 with no consequence or CHA not actually influencing sorcerer spells despite the description), but those are easily fixed and on the whole I actually liked BG's attribute system a lot better than NWN, KOTOR et al where you are constantly adding point after point to your attribute score. I liked BG1&2 and FO1&2's approach of letting the player roll who their character is at the beginning and only providing a boost via certain situations or items. It makes the character feel more like a person with defined characteristics and limitations that you are forced to play within than a featureless lump of clay that you will be molding into some semblance of usefulness for the rest of the game. Just my personal preference though.

In fact, it's actually something I find myself missing in many other games I've played since, so yes, I'd say there are a big part of the Infinity Engine Experience(TM).

 

[Athelas]

You're vastly overstating the effect stats had in the IE games. Thac0, number of attacks per round, weapon proficiencies and spell arsenals were the most important things and they were all tied to class and level. Stats were good for fixed armor class bonuses and minor additional accuracy with ranged weapons (dex) and melee damage and accuracy bonuses (str) that paled in comparison to the boosts you got from equipment and became even less significant as you gained more levels. And maybe a few bonus spell slots. And pointing out that there was equipment and potions that boosted stats is an argument AGAINST the significance of assigning stats at character creation.

I don't think you understand what cargo cult means.

Sure I do.

Copying something or some aspect of it without actually understanding the why of it.

Yes, and how does that apply to PoE? The stats (what they do, not what they're called) are, like you said, radically different from D&D.

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

You're vastly overstating the effect stats had in the IE games.

No, I'm not. I just gave an example in each case. THAC0 was affected by dexterity too btw and strength helped determine melee damage, CON influenced hitpoints, etc etc.

You are the one who isn't representing stats accurately. Tell me that a character with all 5s in his attributes isn't going to play much differently that a character with all 25s - especially in BG1.

No, stat affecting equipment does not cause the stats to be less significant because you don't have said equipment for the whole game and you have an entire party to split it all over. I do think that some of the items were overpowered (no need to boost the stat to max or above so often), but for the most part, it was fun. When you roll a character with certain limitations and then, through time and overcoming challenges, are able to bypass those limitations, it's rather empowering and meaningful. Vs NWN where you get a +3 amulet of willpower. Whoopee! As if that means anything to the player.

 

[Athelas]

You're right, hitpoints were very important - though even that was determined largely by class. But CON determining HP (or rather, survivavibilty) is one of the few things that PoE has retained, so that doesn't leave you with much of an argument. The other stat boosts were minor compared to what your class determined, liike I already pointed out.

Tell me that a character with all 5s in his attributes isn't going to play much differently that a character with all 25s - especially in BG1.

You couldn't get over 18 for a stat in character creation and you would always get a certain cumulative minimum, so 5 in all stats was an impossibility. And of course, all of the classes had mandatory minimums for certain stats, i.e. you couldn't make a Fighter with 5 strength. Futhermore, your stats didn't have a huge effect on the following:

Thac0, number of attacks per round, weapon proficiencies and spell arsenals

Besides, your scenario assumes someone would deliberately handicap their character in the extreme. If we're talking about reasonable stat builds that actually made a significant difference between characters of the same class, there were very little or even none. Multi-classing was a far more significant way of differentiating characters.

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

You're right, hitpoints were very important - though even that was determined largely by class. But CON determining HP (or rather, survivavibilty) is one of the few things that PoE has retained, so that doesn't leave you with much of an argument.

All of the stat effects were important in one way or another whether you choose to acknowledge that or not. Especially in the low-level BG1. Again, tell me a character with all 5s won't play differently than one with all 18s or all 25s. The very fact that items and potions that provide boosts to stats exist is proof of their effect.

edit: I know you couldn't roll a character with all 5s. It's an example. My point is that they have an effect and a pretty decent sized one at that - especially in BG1. Is it as much as what class you pick? Probably not. But there is still an effect.

 

[RK47]

It's probably why people never gave Khalid a chance but brought Minsc and Shar-teel in the party.

 

[Ziem]

The funny thing is this whole "might = damage, regardless of what you're using" doesn't actually solve the problem (is that even a real problem?) of dump stats, wizard will just dump dex, per, con or resolve, so nothing will really change.. except, of course, the part where our mages will have to build their muscles to cast more effectively LOL

 

[Shadenuat]

The change in mindset that all the PoE talk brought made people think too much about general stats as something worthy only for combat "builds". On the contrary I always saw the standard 6 stats of D&D as a basis for simulation of character, or any creature in the world, a way to resolve the dispute in roleplaying. The low, or high strength, int or dex are there to meet players expectations about what creatures in the world are and what can they do, and compare their characters to other creatures.
Never was bothered with dump stats in D&D that much - and if every developer paid enough attention to them like Avellone did in PST, many ppl would not be bothered either I think.

I think for many people system simulating an adventure, not abstract game you could just play with pretty tokens, is what system should achieve.

I found it interesting when DraQ, while arguing how can you make this build work or that build work, still fell back on actual roleplaying and interesting characters that made sense, something that could not be solved by slapping a +crit% on INT for fighters, but something that could actually be played. For example, the idea that Barbarian with high INT could have an option of brewing elixirs and drugs that would throw him into rage and make as powerful as a Barbarian with high STR, as well as have high tracking skill to follow his enemies. That is actually a real character right there, a sort we sometimes read about in books (reminded me of Elric), but you can see that to make that character into a sucessful one in the game while meeting all the "must make sense" criteria would require a lot more than just working with stats.

I also don't understand what is so interesting in playing an intelligent warrior or dumb wizard the way PoE presents them. IRL characters like that are an interesting challenge that might work due to player's creativity or an interesting plot and actions. When I'm thinking about playing a wizard with low INT, I'm thinking about playing someone like Rincewind from Discworld, maybe a charlatan or/and a coward. I certanly would not come up with a wizard who is so muscled up that he is throwing people with... uh, something... and does a lot of damage with spell... somehow.
If my options are a wizard with strong AoEs or big AoEs, I really don't care. I'd rather choose between Transmuter or Necromancer, for example.

And the conclusion to all that is... uh... I don't know what the conclusion really is.
Really hot here now, I need a mountain dew.

I always feel like I'm losing a sanity point every time I read a thread like this.

 

[Telengard]

I always feel like I'm losing a sanity point every time I read a thread like this.

Don't worry, you are.

 

[Avellion]

I guess that all this time Josh Sawyer's always wanted to play as a muscle wizard.


Instead of affecting AoE or something lame like that. They could have done it in much more interesting ways. How about letting the mage use that brawn for well physical stuff rather than his spellcasting. A spellcaster with enough strength could grapple an enemy's attack, hurl them away, enchant his body or summon a weapon, to join the frontlines. Plenty of ways you can make a mage benefit from strength, which is far more impactful to gameplay and has a much bigger impact on playstyle than +AoE.

 

[Bubbles]

Having one stat for all damage makes the game a lot more accessible though.

 

[Athelas]

I found it interesting when DraQ, while arguing how can you make this build work or that build work, still fell back on actual roleplaying and interesting characters that made sense, something that could not be solved by slapping a +crit% on INT for fighters, but something that could actually be played. For example, the idea that Barbarian with high INT could have an option of brewing elixirs and drugs that would throw him into rage and make as powerful as a Barbarian with high STR, as well as have high tracking skill to follow his enemies. That is actually a real character right there, a sort we sometimes read about in books (reminded me of Elric), but you can see that to make that character into a sucessful one in the game while meeting all the "must make sense" criteria would require a lot more than just working with stats.

Uhm, it's a party-based game. So yeah, you could invest INT in a Barbarian for brewing potions and stuff...or you could do those things with a character who already relies on INT for their combat abilities (i.e. a mage). The latter is the obvious superior choice.

 

[DraQ]

Uhm, it's a party-based game. So yeah, you could invest INT in a Barbarian for brewing potions and stuff...or you could do those things with a character who already relies on INT for their combat abilities (i.e. a mage). The latter is the obvious superior choice.

You miss the point.

In a class based game classes need to have some exclusive abilities to justify their existence.
Barbarian - i.e. uncivilized savage is a prime candidate for stuff like all sorts of natural lore - which includes stuff like tracking people and beasts in the wilderness, knowledge of wilderness herbs and animals and so on.
Those are potentially powerful tools and obviously governed by intelligence - stuff like tracking your prey takes significant brainpower and even in unembellished RL there are bare-assed savages capable of performing mindbogglingly impressive feats in this area - after all being a bare-assed savage doesn't imply being a moron.
In a fantasy setting getting tracked by a high INT barb would be worse than having a fucking Predator after your ass.

Yes, you might argue that this conflates some traditional classes, like barbarian and ranger or even druid if you add a dash of primal magic as possible character building option, but that's a foregone conclusion if we're aiming to eliminate dump stats - the point is keeping the classes we will keep distinct enough while allowing them to specialize in different ways, using different (secondary) attributes.

 

[eremita]

It's probably why people never gave Khalid a chance but brought Minsc and Shar-teel in the party.

Khalid was one of the most durable NPC in the game. Great CON and good DEX made him a perfect frontline fighter who could take a lot of damage/not getting hit at all. Much Much better than Minsc or Shar-teel in this regard. Minsc was always good in one thing only - slicing enemies...

 

[eremita]

The change in mindset that all the PoE talk brought made people think too much about general stats as something worthy only for combat "builds". On the contrary I always saw the standard 6 stats of D&D as a basis for simulation of character, or any creature in the world, a way to resolve the dispute in roleplaying. The low, or high strength, int or dex are there to meet players expectations about what creatures in the world are and what can they do, and compare their characters to other creatures.
Never was bothered with dump stats in D&D that much - and if every developer paid enough attention to them like Avellone did in PST, many ppl would not be bothered either I think.

What are you talking about? STR, DEX and CON were dump stats in that game...

 

[Zetor]

Yeah, Khalid was a great tank / soaker, and he could do decent damage with that +2 chilling longsword and gauntlets of ogre power (who else could use that, Minsc?). The only problem with him was that he'd panic way earlier than everyone else. Not a critical issue with remove fear casts on hand (I played a cavalier), but still.

 

[DraQ]

(I played a cavalier)

Much more of an issue in vanilla.

 

[Mystary!]

Why not have stats work differently, but similarly, for all classes? Some would benefit more from some stats but all would benefit from them in some way.
Might for wizards is simply spellpower, straight up damage, but for barbarians its brawn, more carrying capacity and melee damage. Both could use it in dialogue to intimidate, because they are "Mighty".
Intellectual barbarians get more uses and longer durations of their skills, clever dialogues, lore etc, but only wizards would get larger AoEs.