So what exactly is Trash combat?

[Morning Star]

I wish I could remember how I felt the first time I encountered Tarnesh...IIRC the guards helped and even killed Tarnesh, so I guess I was lucky. I think luck is actually more important here than metagaming.

Tarnesh (if i remember this right) casts mirror images, then horror, then magic missile.
Sure, you CAN save vs. horror and hide and let the guards earn their wage, but more often than not, a lvl 1 character fails the roll, starts running around and gets killed by a magic missile.

You could make a case both for and against the design of this encounter.
On one hand it teaches you to be on your toes, and it gives you an excuse to ditch dead party members (after all there are plenty more to recruit).
On the other hand, if CHARNAME is killed it's Game Over, so that is an argument against such a difficult encounter.
But death from out of nowhere is nothing new if you have previously played the Wizardry games or Might&Magic 1-2.

Sure, death out of nowhere is part of a game, I'm just saying that making it possible so early in the game (you can literally die minutes after Gorion's death if you explore north on that same map, because a single wolf is enough to kill you) is not very good design. You can make the player feel vulnerable without necessarily forcing him to reload.

I think the Friendly Arm assassin was meant to be a difficulty spike example that showed the players that they couldn't just blindly charge at all their enemies and have to use some tactics when dealing with mages.

Which, too, could be done without necessarily putting the PC against almost insurmountable odds.

As for the Friendly Arm being neutral, they didn't actually disarm the visitors (and how would they disarm a wizard? not let him sleep to prevent him memorizing his spells?), they just warned them to behave or else they would be dealt with by the guards (the guards do turn hostile to the wizard since he initiated the combat and the PC can just run away and let the guards deal with him).

I know, I'm just saying that your expectations were of finally getting to a safe place to gear up a bit and get new people to join you. Mind you, it can actually be a GOOD think to overturn expectations and play on them, you just have to do it right.

 

[set]

Trash combat is fine if the name of the game is 'survival', where the game's objective is to have you manage resources against a constant stream of conflict. JA2 comes to mind - you have to protect your territory, expand your territory, and pull back wounded or resource depleted parties back to an airfield. If the game didn't constantly barrage you with waves of enemies, you would swiftly snowball and beat the game easily after winning the first dozen battles. Maybe it becomes exhausting to deal with after a while, but the 'trash' combat has a purpose. Perhaps JA2 would have been better if all the trash combat were replaced with more varied encounters, but you have to admit that from a design constraint, it's hard for such an open game to offer varied situations outside of the basics. It would be hard to deplete a player's resources by throwing smaller amounts of different or dificult encounters every once in a while as opposed to waves of similar encounters. The most they could have done was introduce tanks sooner, but that would simply reduce the 'specialness' of them.

One of the things trash combat imposes is a resource constraint - a dungeon can deplete your health potions or whatever if it throws trash encounters constantly at you. This can enhance challenge and make further situations more difficult, depending upon your mastery of the game. If you can easily deal with trash, then the boss at the end of the dungeon is much easier because you still have a fresh supply of resources to utilize.

In Dragon Age, trash encounters really have little bearing on the game's difficulty, because most of the game's resources have been simplified. I mean, the most you can do is waste a few health or mana flasks, but that's only in combat. If a companion 'dies' or uses up all its mana, at the end of battle it's all refreshed, so you can only consume resources if you are encountering difficult battles constantly. Because trash mobs generally aren't difficult in DA, they offer no challenge.

In the case of a game like Path of Exile, the game is built around trash encounters and can be fun to people because of it. They drop loot. That loot is the emphasis of the game. Becoming a master of killing certain kinds of trash mobs in certain ways allows a player to become rich and powerful. It is a game and many enjoy that kind of game. Trash monsters in this case are fine, and in the case of PoE, the developers at least are happy to throw in some random elements to keep trash mobs from becoming too trashy.

I think combat encounters that are varied are good. Developers cannot always afford this, however. There will always be some amount of 'repeating' and I think is going to be a measure of if you really like the game or not. If you like its mechanics and if you like its story, you will enjoy the repetitive nature of the game and really enjoy the moments where it diversifies itself. Having a game that has no repetition is going to be short and expensive to produce and is probably better for a game that doesn't want a large emphasis on combat. As far as non-video games are concerned, you can have a pen and paper game that's very engaging that maybe only has three combat encounters over a ten hour play session. Because human minds can easily draw up mechanics or content, there's no cost with having a pen and paper game that has strong elements of economy, espionage, exploration and combat. But for a game to offer all those things and more, is a lot of money in assets and code to produce, so naturally, some amount of repetition must occur.

Games that need some amount of trash encounters for their gameplay to make sense (like a survival-based game) should endeavor to build as many dynamic systems as possible - dynamic terrain, dynamic AI, etc. this at least has a chance of creating new situations from copy-paste encounters.

 

[DraQ]

Sure, death out of nowhere is part of a game, I'm just saying that making it possible so early in the game (you can literally die minutes after Gorion's death if you explore north on that same map, because a single wolf is enough to kill you) is not very good design.

Actually, I don't mind wolves (although XP system has stupid side effect of making even a fucking druid or ranger think in terms of "Look! An animal! Let's kill it!") you can take them right from the start with a bit of caution and ranged attacks. You can even try tackling bears if you get Monty and Xzar, although it may require kiting and a bit of luck.

But Tarnesh is just quite awful - a scummy encounter hinging mostly on luck or metaknowledge. Unless you prebuff with the right counterspell, preemptively place a hidden thief at his back or score lucky hit before he casts mirror images, you're likely toast.

I know, I'm just saying that your expectations were of finally getting to a safe place to gear up a bit and get new people to join you. Mind you, it can actually be a GOOD think to overturn expectations and play on them, you just have to do it right.

Overturning expectations is great, but "lol, now reload" is not the best tool for the job.

Which is why you conserve your spells. Only retards use spells against trash mobs anyway, which according to you is what BG1 mostly comprises of. So unless you're a retard, why would you want to rest in the first place?

To change loadout, for example?

Because I stumbled upon area with those weird lifelike sculptures and something tells me my generic adventuring loadout might not be up to task?

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

That guy you meet the Friendly Arm? If you're a caster, he throws a magic missile your way and you're dead. Nothing you can do about it, when you have 4 or 6 hit points. So the solution is metagaming by putting someone else in front, or leveling up before reaching the Arm. Because the alternative is dying without being able to do anything at all. Which is not good design, really.

He doesn't. He casts mirror image, then horror and then starts casting magic missiles.

 

[Jasede]

Trash combat involves train tickets.

...newfags....

 

[Morning Star]

That guy you meet the Friendly Arm? If you're a caster, he throws a magic missile your way and you're dead. Nothing you can do about it, when you have 4 or 6 hit points. So the solution is metagaming by putting someone else in front, or leveling up before reaching the Arm. Because the alternative is dying without being able to do anything at all. Which is not good design, really.

He doesn't. He casts mirror image, then horror and then starts casting magic missiles.

I'm assuming you haven't read all the replies in the thread, so I'll leave it at that.

edited: why do i remember what Tarnesh casts, but can't remember the birthday date of most of my friends...

 

[Daemongar]

This thread started with promise and now boils down to what was considered standard D&D conventions a few years back are now shit:
* Random encounters = trash combat
* Encounters while sleeping = trash combat
* Enemies below threat level = trash combat
* Enemies not contributing to the overall story arch = trash combat

What a load of ... garbage. Like BG/don't like BG, I don't care. The rub is with what was pretty much standard fare at BG1's time of release. The problems with trash fights are not with BG1. There are about four types of combat encounters in BG1:

1. Random encounters/random encounters while sleeping: this was a staple of D&D. Same as in Goldbox and other games. The creators of BG1 didn't do it to waste peoples time, or to pad the game. These encounters helped with giving the player some cash, and random XPs which helps balance out the incredible amount of XPs needed to advance. Needing tons of XPs is now considered bad form. It also makes sense: resting in the gnoll fortress was a lot likelier to encounter random mobs than in the forest, even if gnolls are weak. The problem here is not with BG1 but with D&D.

2. Set, story contributing encounters: That mage, named npcs, etc: They keep the player on the trail of the story, and are of a set level. This is a good thing, but may be tricky to someone encountering them for the first time. Fortunately, there is no one here with that perspective. Not-trash.

3. Set, non-story contributing strong encounters: Basilisks, Ogrillions, enemy parties, etc. They keep the player from going into dangerous places until the player is high enough level, or have treasure that is worth a bit of risk to low levels. A staple of almost all non-linear rpgs. Not trash.

4. Set, non-story contributing weak encounters: kobolds, giberlings, .5 hd creatures etc. This is probably the only group one could consider trash. However, they still advance the story. They show the threat to the typical citizen/slob and need to be there. Too many and yep, they are trash. Not enough and the player says, well, fuck, why do these people need a hero? Also serve to let players know they are in the right area to advance the story. Sometimes the only way to know I was heading in the right direction is the presence of enemy units.

BG1 tried to emulate D&D, warts and all. It succeeded.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

edited: why do i remember what Tarnesh casts, but can't remember the birthday date of most of my friends...

It's easier to remember actions from games than dry numbers.

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

Tarnesh (if i remember this right) casts mirror images, then horror, then magic missile.
Sure, you CAN save vs. horror and hide and let the guards earn their wage, but more often than not, a lvl 1 character fails the roll, starts running around and gets killed by a magic missile.

I've beat the game solo plenty of times. You simply need to interrupt his spells. Easy as a mage with magic missle. More difficult if you use other spells or weapons though, but still quite possible.

 

[DraQ]

This thread started with promise and now boils down to what was considered standard D&D conventions a few years back are now shit:
* Random encounters = trash combat
* Encounters while sleeping = trash combat
* Enemies below threat level = trash combat
* Enemies not contributing to the overall story arch = trash combat

Except none of these is true.

* Random encounters can be perfectly cool, they add unpredictability and force player to prepare.
* Encounters while sleeping are awesome, they are great way to force players to be careful with their camping spots and great tool to put stress on resource management.
* Enemies below threat level are cool once in a while, they help mark your progress and it's always fun to curbstomp some dumbass bandits who made a mistake of attacking you or return to kick their ass for robbing you earlier.
* Enemies not contributing to overall story arch are cool too, as long as they make sense in the context and serve some purpose.


The problems with BG1 are:

* Barring travel there are no actual random encounters. There are only standard encounters for given area repeated ad infinitum (I guess it's called infinity engine for a reason), with waves of standard cloned enemies carrying standard loot.
* Encounters while sleeping pose minimum threat and can't be reasonably managed in any way by choosing camping spot, only by doing multi h trips between inn and wilderness, during which you'll get tired again before you'll get to explore the next area.
* Enemies below threat level attack you incessantly and are slaughtered en masse, throwing their lives away against their better judgement, even if they just want some fresh meat or your stuff which will be of no use to them if they are dead.
* Aforementioned encounters not just fail to contribute to the current story arch, but they actively work to erode any semblance of sense in the setting.

Compare a game like Wizardry 8, which is about as fair as it can get, given that being a crawler it's pretty much made from nominally trash combat and has too much combat for its own good, even for a fucking crawler that's all about slaughtering things and taking their stuff:

* random encounters are varied and drop varied, but sensible loot.
* encounters while sleeping can mess you up or outright TPK you, forcing you to pick spots where you're unlikely to be found and will have good defensive position if you are when you want to rest.
* ok, there is level scaling but enemies below your threat level, when they appear, provide a welcome change of pace, while the encounters themselves, though overabundant can often be successfully bypassed or avoided if you're in a "oh no, another fight" mood for any reason.
* enemies not contributing to overall story arch (plenty of them because, you know, a crawler) are diverse, fun to fight and moderately justified.

These encounters helped with giving the player some cash

Players are routinely so awesome at helping themselves with cash that they don't need to be helped by the devs.

and random XPs which helps balance out the incredible amount of XPs needed to advance.

Quest XP can be adjusted freely and balanced easily.

It also makes sense: resting in the gnoll fortress was a lot likelier to encounter random mobs than in the forest, even if gnolls are weak.

It makes no sense if gnolls have to tread knee deep in dead gnolls to reach the party. You'd think they'd learn. Even dumb mundane animals would.
Also, gnolls being weak was fucking incongruent with presentation - when I first saw a bunch of humanoid hyenas about 1.5 times as tall and 2 times as muscled as any of my party members, each wielding a fucking halberd my first thought was "o kurwa." and definitely not "weak" in any physical sense.

Then they just dropped dead to my noobish party, with, IIRC only one scoring a lucky hit putting Imoen in deep red - no prob, I had healing spells and could camp.
Also, the encounters were tedious as fuck and did waste my time.
And no, fuck D&D.

2. Set, story contributing encounters: That mage, named npcs, etc: They keep the player on the trail of the story, and are of a set level. This is a good thing, but may be tricky to someone encountering them for the first time. Fortunately, there is no one here with that perspective. Not-trash.

Tarnesh was bad, others were passable to good.

3. Set, non-story contributing strong encounters: Basilisks, Ogrillions, enemy parties, etc. They keep the player from going into dangerous places until the player is high enough level, or have treasure that is worth a bit of risk to low levels. A staple of almost all non-linear rpgs. Not trash.

Ogrillions were moderately trash given how easy it was to rape most most mundane opponents in BG by switching to ranged weapons before the closed in. Others were cool.

4. Set, non-story contributing weak encounters: kobolds, giberlings, .5 hd creatures etc. This is probably the only group one could consider trash. However, they still advance the story. They show the threat to the typical citizen/slob and need to be there. Too many and yep, they are trash. Not enough and the player says, well, fuck, why do these people need a hero?

Maybe they should just sic a bunch of those peasant slaughtering housecats on them or something.

 

[Norfleet]

There's "filler" combat, and then there's TRASH combat. It's one thing to have filler combat. The player may even desire to seek out additional filler combat just to test out his awesome new guns on it. TRASH combat is different. Trash combat is what happens when filer combat becomes mandatory and pushed to a degenerate extreme, long after ceases to be engaging, interesting, or challenging. The player starts to run from fights, not because these fights are dangerous, or consume resources, but just because the process of fighting them is too time-consuming. You know it: You take three steps in the dungeon, and get warped into YET ANOTHER fight. You hit "Run", just to get away from the tiresome interruption, even though you could flatten these monsters in 2 rounds with no damage...just because you DON'T WANT TO BE BOTHERED TO DO IT ANYMORE, and WHY DO THESE WOLVES KEEP ATTACKING YOU?

This is TRASH combat.

 

[Morning Star]

Tarnesh (if i remember this right) casts mirror images, then horror, then magic missile.
Sure, you CAN save vs. horror and hide and let the guards earn their wage, but more often than not, a lvl 1 character fails the roll, starts running around and gets killed by a magic missile.

I've beat the game solo plenty of times. You simply need to interrupt his spells. Easy as a mage with magic missle. More difficult if you use other spells or weapons though, but still quite possible.

If you're level 1 (or any low level you usually are at that point), Tarnesh casts mirror images right after dialogue, and your 1 magic missile does pretty much nothing.

 

[DraQ]

If you're level 1 (or any low level you usually are at that point), Tarnesh casts mirror images right after dialogue, and your 1 magic missile does pretty much nothing.

Well, if you're level 1 AND are mage, you have a chance of interrupting casting with M&Ms.
But what if you aren't? Ranged attacks may or may not work - the window of opportunity for interrupting mirror images is very short - melee pretty much relies on metaknowledge and having thief behind Tanresh in the shadows, ready to plunge a dagger into his robed ass.

Poorly designed "lol, I kill u" encounter overall.
They should have placed someone more into menial work there instead.

 

[Daemongar]

Except none of these is true.

To summarize your post by sections

The problems with BG1 are:

You don't understand how random encounters in D&D work. They work with region specific random encounter tables. When traveling, a DM rolls for random encounters, when sleeping a DM rolls for random encounters. The frequency of rolls and likelihood is based on danger level of area.

Compare with games like Wizardry 8

Newer game, uses more varied random encounter talbes, unlike D&D. D&D does not use level scaling, but different areas have different random encounters based on the "level" of the area. You may fight 6 bandits or 2 ettercaps or 1 sword spider. All adding up to about the same threat.

Players are routinely so awesome at helping themselves with cash that they don't need to be helped by the devs.

Meta-gaming problem

Quest XP can be adjusted freely and balanced easily.

Less combat, more xps for quests. That about right?

It makes no sense if gnolls have to tread knee deep in dead gnolls to reach the party.

Semi-intelligent creatures are defending their home. Their weakness relative to their size is a direct problem with you selecting "NORMAL" difficulty, which does 75% of normal damage, and gnolls are weaker.

Ogrillions were moderately trash given how easy it was to rape most most mundane opponents in BG by switching to ranged weapons before they closed in.

Meta-gaming problems, problems with appropriately setting the difficulty slider. Again, ogrillions would only do 75% of normal damage against a party that gets max xps per level.

In summary: you want to add level scaling, less combat but more xp rewards for quests, and the game to set that difficulty slider for you. Oh, and they should have done all this 15 fucking years ago because they should have know that people of the future would be lazy slobs that want greater rewards for doing less.

 

[DraQ]

The problems with BG1 are:

You don't understand how random encounters in D&D work. They work with region specific random encounter tables. When traveling, a DM rolls for random encounters, when sleeping a DM rolls for random encounters. The frequency of rolls and likelihood is based on danger level of area.

Roll? For most BG1 areas flipping would be enough.

D&D.

Yawn. Tabletop emulators are a quaint bunch. Insisting on use of simplistic rulesets and minimalistic, fractured mechanics despite not being played with live people with only pen, paper and bunch of dice to run the mechanics on, but interaction and flexibility of living humans to make up for that.
It's like making a booze emulator - it gives you a perfectly authentic hangover and does an adequate job ruining your liver, as well as getting you into shitty situations with your derpy behaviour. Too bad it completely fails at actual intoxication, but hey, three out of four isn't bad, right?

Their weakness relative to their size is a direct problem with you selecting "NORMAL" difficulty, which does 75% of normal damage, and gnolls are weaker.

In BG2/TUTU maybe.

Default slider position in BG1 is middle which is explicitly referred to as standard AD&D rules by the game.
In BG2 default is at lower position, with the nerf you mention as well as no gibbing or other unresurrectable deaths for partymembers.

In summary: you want to add level scaling

And you want to be anally violated with an RPG-7.

Or maybe you'll just quit telling me what I do and do not want, m'kay?

 

[Johannes]

Laughable. Clearing trash mobs in Wiz8 took way more time than in BG, even with the mod that speeds the combat up. And on the other hand has only a fraction of the amount of interesting setpiece battles compared to BG.

 

[Daemongar]

Or maybe you'll just quit telling me what I do and do not want, m'kay?

I would, but I'm pretty sure you wouldn't want me to.

 

[DraQ]

Laughable. Clearing trash mobs in Wiz8 took way more time than in BG, even with the mod that speeds the combat up. And on the other hand has only a fraction of the amount of interesting setpiece battles compared to BG.

It may be taking more time but is never nearly as tedious, has varied enemies attacking you in varied ways and leaving varied loot, and when it does become tedious you can usually try to avoid the combat.
I took a game form a genre effectively made of technically trash combat as a counterexample for a reason - to show *HOW* trash BG1 trash combat is.

Stuff like party-vs-party combat is p. good in BG1, too bad about all the trash in between.

 

[Daemongar]

In KOTOR right before the final battle,at the end (I'm not going to spoiler this) you are hit by wave after wave after wave of dark jedi and other slobs. It does't do anything but waste time. Its like Call of Duty with non-stop mobs. Think it was at least an hour of fights that you could just slice through with a lightsaber. No real reason. Just glad they did the same at the end of KOTOR2, with the Temple. That felt like trash.