Forum Droppings From JE Sawyer

[xenocide]

The argument that making a game for the casual player is okay doesn't sit with me. Are games like Civilization (which, if you're a new player, requires a pretty intensive manual reading session before you even start) going the way of the dodo? What about things like Starcraft? What, just because some retard can't figure out that marines are easily slaughtered, we're suddenly going to remove some of the more advanced units in the game, take out some of the variety and dumb it down, and all this just for poor little Johnny?

I have to agree with this. The fact is to paly most games well takes time and familiarity with the game.

That's the person who tags Doctor, Gambling, and Outdoorsman with Skilled and Jinxed as traits. Is it their fault that they chose those skills and traits, or is it my fault as a designer for making them suck so badly compared to other skills and traits?

So what... are you saying that I should be able to close my eyes, pick any two traits and tag any three skills and the character that results should be equal to all other possible characters? I don't agree that this should be a goal of the game design.

Yes, all skills should have a usefull use in the game, but they should not all be exactly equal. A player will need some experience to learn what to do. When I palyed Freedom Force for the first time, I didn't know what powers were the best, same goes for Deus Ex, Age of Wonders, System Shock 2, Prelude to Darkness, Avernum, and any other game with skill, powers or different kinds of units. Also, some skills will work better in concert with other skills, all combinations SHOULD not be equal.

As far as perks go, I don't think they should all be equal either. Most should be somewhat equal as far as their power in the game is concerened, but some should aslo be fun unique things that are not neccisarily made for "powergamers".

[~Kagemaru~]

I have to agree with JE a bit on his thoughts on the SPECIAL system. There needs to be some changes. Why do you think D&D is now going into it's 3E edition now? Things always need tinkering and fixing.

The last time SPECIAL was really used was in 1998 for Fallout 2 (This is excluding Lionheart since it's a bit of a different game). If Fallout 3 is in the works, don't you think that there should be some changes since it has already been 5 years since then?

However, I do see everyone's need for anger towards change in the system. Here's an example.... Have you ever heard of the PnP RPG 'Hackmaster'? It's basically 2nd Ed D&D just more "hardcore". They created a specific rule for standing in the middle of a forest and banging two helmets together, seeing how many monsters would come to attack you. Now that's just plain silly. Basically, no one wants silly rules like this in a game, and in Fallout 3, we don't want nonsense like that in it.

I do agree with JE on a lot of points though. I think 'Gifted' is abused alot. Heck, whenever I'm playing a 'SPECIAL' game, like Fallout 2 or even the Lionheart Demo, I always have 'Gifted' for my character. There's just not really a big negative to having gifted. The thing about all the Perks, is that there is some contrasting negative to it, so you have to think twice about choosing the right one. Some are also silly novelty perks that have no use in game. What JE wants is to make it more balanced out, so you really really have to think on picking a perk like 'gifted' or not.

On powergaming, it dilutes the fun in the game. People who are powergamers just want to enjoy the game by killing things. ALOT. What JE meant by 'complaining' in IWD2 was that the powergamers just wanted to breeze through the game and kill things. In fallout, killing is fun, but you're playing the game for another reason, right? You're playing the game to resolve problems in the game world. If you just like to kill things, you should be playing a FPS and not an RPG. Or maybe go play FOBOS :roll:

I don't think the game is being dumbed down really, I think it's just getting a bit ironed out. When you eat a cake, do you use your knife and fork cutting open the box it's in, instead of just opening it?

[Elwro]

Hello everyone, it's my first post here.

Just a small thought: Rayt was speaking about FO1, so the comments about rig-blowing and dealing with robots are, imho, a bit irrelevant (I remember Mr Handy tho).

I never took Gifted for my character; I always considered that almost cheating. I take Finesse, and that's all. Just like to aim at the eyes .

[Killzig]

Hello everyone, it's my first post here.

Just a small thought: Rayt was speaking about FO1, so the comments about rig-blowing and dealing with robots are, imho, a bit irrelevant (I remember Mr Handy tho).

I never took Gifted for my character; I always considered that almost cheating. I take Finesse, and that's all. Just like to aim at the eyes .

Hey Elwro, welcome. Actually the comments on robots are right on target with fallout. Think about going into the Glow and being able to take a few sentry bots with you as a travelling party.

[Rayt]

Rayt, I edited your post the trait is called "Fast Shot" ... Anyways, yea. I agree, you should be able to pick up a handy way of defending yourself / making your way with that set of skills.

By then you should have had at least one NPC. The AI for npcs was pretty craptacular and they were pretty much cannon fodder.

To make your character viable they would of had to have better AI and stronger NPCs. More automated combat systems and/or less dungeon type environments (caves, and whatnot)...

Doctor would have kept your npcs happy and healthy.

Science and Repair to work on those angry waroid bots that you find in old military facilities. Who knows by the end of the game you could be Dr. Who with an army of Dahleks!

Haha, that would have been pretty sweet.

I think the problem is that with such a variety of skills, and if you want to work them smoothly in a the game, you have to set up tons of different ways to deal with situations. For example, how to deal with Gizmo. If you want to get rid of him, you can use a weapon skill to just kill him, but it would have been fun to use your science skill to build a bomb and place it in his house. Or maybe use your Outdoorsman skill to capturer snakes and throw them in his bed ( though that's not what the Outdoorsman skill is used for). Or use your Speech skill to convince those pesky gang boys to kill Gizmo for you (because you can offer them a much sweeter deal). Or if you have the Doctor skill, you could put something in his food or drink and make it look like he had a heart attack.

I know shit about gamedesign, but this seems to me as a whole lot of writing for coders.

[atoga]

Why do you think D&D is now going into it's 3E edition now?

So WOTC can make a lot of extra cash with minimal input? It seems a lot of the half-assed suggestions from JE are merely made to make SPECIAL look 'sleek', without considering balance.

There's no RPG in existence where powergaming is impossible. Such a thing cannot be avoided: some paths are always more viable than others. The key is to modify the game world, not the rules system, so that each character type can be given a fighting chance, so to speak. Obscure skills, such as Gambling, should net huge rewards if the player knows where to look as well.

Oh, and Hackmaster pwns.

[Spazmo]

Well, I don't think anyone can deny that Second Edition was total ass, so a Third Edition was necessary. 3.5E is something else.

[atoga]

Well, I don't think anyone can deny that Second Edition was total ass, so a Third Edition was necessary. 3.5E is something else.

Nah. Second Ed has street cred. A lot of people like it actually.

[Spazmo]

A lot of people like NWN. Hey, I played 2nd Ed for years, but it was a clunky and generally poor system, especially when compared to a streamlined game like 3rd Ed.

[swordinstone]

I think 3rd Ed made some good changes. Some of the Kits from 2nd Ed just fucked shit up... like the dwarven fighter/cleric kit that let you start with a magic weapon. The only thing balancing them were other kits, which made playing a vanilla character pointless.

[Smiley]

I'm sure as hell not going to cry if gifted gets nerfed or ditched.

If anyone does, don't play the next Fo-game >=/

[pnutz]

I'm sure as hell not going to cry if gifted gets nerfed or ditched.

If anyone does, don't play the next Fo-game

Although I do agree that Gifted needs to be tweaked to have less benefit, more penalty (but not with the perks), I sure don't want it to go away.

They'd have to fuck up pretty bad to keep me from playing the next Fallout.
Hell, they could make Fallout an action game for XBox and I'd still-


...wait, not if they did that. Good god no.

[~Kagemaru~]

About D&D, 2nd edition has some strong points. 3rd edition overall is balanced... except that the Ranger class stinks (actually, it always has, that's why in 3E they're fixing it) and Monks are way too powerful, since they're a broken class. They weren't in 2nd edition.

I have nothing against Hackmaster, it's just that I have a good laugh at some of the stuff that's in the book. Like, if you were cutting a piece of wood with a saw, where there's a chance you'll cut your arm off if you got a critical fumble.

And yes, it is hard to make a game to not be powergamed. There will always be powergamers (sadly) that will seek every advantage making their character 'killer'. But, since fallout 3 will be a single player (and co-op) game, I don't think JE should really concentrate on powergaming issues. If the game had any competitive play, yes he should work on it, but it doesn't... so he doesn't really have to.

Instead, let him work on balancing some issues in the game. I think it's a good thing that he takes the time telling us about what things he's thinking of changing, and listens to some of the community. I mean, he could not tell us anything and we would be totally left out in the dark about the game.

[swordinstone]

About D&D, 2nd edition has some strong points. 3rd edition overall is balanced... except that the Ranger class stinks (actually, it always has, that's why in 3E they're fixing it)

One interesting change to rangers is, they no longer have to be good. I think all they need is a little buff to their skill points/level. Since its hard to take INT when you need STR, DEX, CON and WIS.

[Sammael]

3.5E rangers have 6+Int skill point per level.