|
So I'm not sure if I missed it in murder by numbers or if the magic system will have its own set of rules, but I was curious as to how this will be implemented in combat. Will spells cost stamina or will their be a separate pool for them? Also how will they handle wizards needing to pre-choose versus a sorcerer who can just sling spells around willy-nilly?
Magic is one of those hit or miss things that is usually solely dumped into the combat side of the house. Will utility spells be in game? Will we have a fly spell and skill? Taking that further can wizards cast fly on fighters and have them float over walls during a siege?
One of the coolest things in Shadow Bane was the ability for certain characters to fly up and over walls, or rogues being able to scale them in DAoC. Eliminated the mindless AoE from top and bottom while you stare at each other like you see in GW2.
EQ is really the last game I remember that had spells that were useful out of combat. Enchanters sucked in a fight but were awesome everywhere else.
While I love a good skeleton summon and fireball, I'm hoping that magic is a little more diverse than this.
Goblin Squad Member
|
EQ is really the last game I remember that had spells that were useful out of combat. Enchanters sucked in a fight but were awesome everywhere else.
While I love a good skeleton summon and fireball, I'm hoping that magic is a little more diverse than this.
Well said.
Refresh Slots
Most combat abilities that are not tied to weapons are Refresh abilities, and they're placed in slots 7–10. These are things like spells, rage abilities, etc. If a character has a spellbook equipped, it can go into one of these slots; activating the spellbook turns all weapon slots into spell slots determined by the spellbook. Wizards will have to find and equip different spellbooks to get access to different spells, with some books being more valuable or rare than others.
This and the differences between sorcerer and wizard spell preparations, iirc, is about as much as we know about the magic system.
I donno, I recall Enchanters being pretty kick ass at CC. IIRC they had some excellent AoE mezz type spells. Or am I thinking of another class?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I donno, I recall Enchanters being pretty kick ass at CC. IIRC they had some excellent AoE mezz type spells. Or am I thinking of another class?
Nah you are spot on, daze, hold x, dominate x, confusion, hypnotism, command x... that's just to name the few i can think off the top of my head
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Valandur, you're remembering correctly. My wife played an Enchanter, and absolutely loved the challenge of keeping 5 or 7 mobs mezzed through a fight. I think even EQ got away from allowing that many mobs to be CC'ed at once, and I know most other games limit it to two or three. She still loves it :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Valandur, you're remembering correctly. My wife played an Enchanter, and absolutely loved the challenge of keeping 5 or 7 mobs mezzed through a fight. I think even EQ got away from allowing that many mobs to be CC'ed at once, and I know most other games limit it to two or three. She still loves it :)
I's a fun playstyle to play. I loved controllers and dominators in CoH, being able to completely lock down several mobs at once was great fun. The problem is it's not at all fun to play against in PvP. No one likes playing a statue.
I's a fun playstyle to play. I loved controllers and dominators in CoH, being able to completely lock down several mobs at once was great fun. The problem is it's not at all fun to play against in PvP. No one likes playing a statue.@Valandur, you're remembering correctly. My wife played an Enchanter, and absolutely loved the challenge of keeping 5 or 7 mobs mezzed through a fight. I think even EQ got away from allowing that many mobs to be CC'ed at once, and I know most other games limit it to two or three. She still loves it :)
True, I remember many times in DAOC when a bard type got the jump on me, grinding my teeth while they whale away on me and my party, but it's combat, somebody's got to lose or you end up with a hand holding game that gets boring way fast.
Honestly I'm a bit concerned at the " we don't want to have anyone frustrated" line of thought. Ryan's said that you can't make everyone happy. I don't think you can make a game with PvP combat AND not ever have anyone frustrated. I doubt any of us would be very happy playing a game where they tried to achieve that. I don't think that they should turn all masochistic on the players either, just keep things realistic in their guildlines and see how it plays out in the pits.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The problem is it's not at all fun to play against in PvP. No one likes playing a statue.
I totally agree. I think the problem is that designers just lock a player down when they're being mezzed, instead of giving them some kind of "battle" to break free.
This is one of the areas where I think the 6-slots for abilities isn't great. I think it would be really cool to be able to train specialized Mental skills that unlocked abilities that helped you fight out of a Mezmerize more quickly.
The problem is it's not at all fun to play against in PvP. No one likes playing a statue.I totally agree. I think the problem is that designers just lock a player down when they're being mezzed, instead of giving them some kind of "battle" to break free.
This is one of the areas where I think the 6-slots for abilities isn't great. I think it would be really cool to be able to train specialized Mental skills that unlocked abilities that helped you fight out of a Mezmerize more quickly.
Does PFRPG have Psionic's? Not sure the later D&D editions even include it, but it would be a cool addition to PFO. Make Psionic's as a trainable role. They could borrow the abilities from Julian May's galactic milieu which are all standard mental powers.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The problem is it's not at all fun to play against in PvP. No one likes playing a statue.I totally agree. I think the problem is that designers just lock a player down when they're being mezzed, instead of giving them some kind of "battle" to break free.
This is one of the areas where I think the 6-slots for abilities isn't great. I think it would be really cool to be able to train specialized Mental skills that unlocked abilities that helped you fight out of a Mezmerize more quickly.
What? Like Will of the Forsaken? Man, this game is nothing but a WoW clone.
The same could also be accomplished by mashing movement keys or blocks etc the way other games handle this (DCUO for example... or the "Saving Throws" IE wiggling the joystick in the old D&D arcade games).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What? Like Will of the Forsaken? Man, this game is nothing but a WoW clone.
*winks*
The same could also be accomplished by mashing movement keys...
I think it would be a lot more entertaining if, for example, you had to "fight" an imaginary monster.
[Edit] Or, for physical Root-type spells, if you were able to hack through the roots. Although, that's getting close to "chopping wood". Which is why I think it would be really cool to have abilities you needed to train in order to break out of control more quickly.
I suppose one possibility would be to give most attacks a secondary effect based on control type... Hrm...
PvP and PvE are fundamentally incompatible. Any game developer that thinks they can have an MMO with PvP and PvE both being meaningful and fun is just deluding themselves. Hint: EVE Online is not a PvE game, and the few PvE features it does have are quite by far the worst experiences in all of gaming history. Do not seek to emulate EVE with swords and robes.
Intricate and powerful non-combat utility, crowd control, summoning and buffs/debuffs are an incredibly important aspect of RPGs. To reduce PFOnline to "press button deal damage combat" would be the surest way to ruin the game. It wouldn't really be a game at that point: it would just be a subscription treadmill. I'm a gamer -- not a cashcow. I'm an RPGamer and I'm not impressed or entertained by mindlessly watching big red numbers float above scantly-clad chicks and ridiculous shoulder pads.
My mages are not nukebots. My fighters are not hack'n'slashers. My Clerics are not healbots. My Rogues are not hack'n'slashers either.
I want an RPG.
Not a first person shooter with swords instead of machineguns.
Give me spells for Flying and Scrying, let me build and rule a castle, let me sneak through a dungeon and steal the crown without ever drawing a dagger, and for goodness sakes, don't remove everything interesting about a living, breathing world just because your marketing suits are telling you to not frustrate the cashcows.
Marketing folks don't know anything about making GAMES. They're only interested in profits. We don't give a shit about your profits. So give us a good GAME.
Marketing suits? Which site did you mean to post this on? :p. GW, unless I'm very mistaken, has no dedicated marketing people.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
Intricate...Marketing folks don't know anything about making GAMES. They're only interested in profits. We don't give a s~*@ about your profits. So give us a good GAME.
A. Marketing folks are whole human beings rather than 'types'.
B. Read a bit about what's up in PFO before exposing your prejudicial guesses.C. If you cannot abide by item B, improve your blind fighting skill or you just look funny fighting empty space.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16
|
We don't give a s$&& about your profits.Just pointing out that "we" in this case most definitely does not include "me".
Yeah, I have no desire to play a game, however good it is in Aunt Tony's estimable opinion, that folds within 6 months because it's not profitable and doesn't make commercial sense.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
PvP and PvE are fundamentally incompatible.
I initially thought this, but since have changed my mind: They should be integrated, like most/as many systems in rpgs as possible. Eg The Banner Saga just released a m-player pvp game on steam, that has iterated the combat that will be in the rpg-single-player-story game when released. Seems a good idea doing it this way. Secondly economy fits integration as well.
Intricate and powerful non-combat utility, crowd control, summoning and buffs/debuffs are an incredibly important aspect of RPGs. To reduce PFOnline to "press button deal damage combat" would be the surest way to ruin the game.
Should this be in the recent blog thread? Because it's relevant to that discussion. The current system mentioned is only the basic backbone. All that stuff fits around it. I think the idea is to create a basic system that CAN include as much as any subsystem as possible so it is flexible and not unwieldy and so can be iterated successfully.
It wouldn't really be a game at that point: it would just be a subscription treadmill. I'm a gamer -- not a cashcow. I'm an RPGamer and I'm not impressed or entertained by mindlessly watching big red numbers float above scantly-clad chicks and ridiculous shoulder pads.
Aren't we all...
My mages are not nukebots. My fighters are not hack'n'slashers. My Clerics are not healbots. My Rogues are not hack'n'slashers either.
I want an RPG.
Not a first person shooter with swords instead of machineguns.
I think you are asking for a distinction between player-input, character-input and computer-input (eg RNG) in the combat system? That's a good question and at the heart of the discussion on the blog: "Murder By Numbers".
An RPG is essentially a "progression system"/"growth of your character": Combat is an excellent way to represent this actively for the player and the distinction between how this is represented in the above 3 makes all the difference. I think because the combat is aimed to be pvp and pve the Holy Trinity you describe above will not be the key concept in PFO.
Give me spells for Flying and Scrying, let me build and rule a castle, let me sneak through a dungeon and steal the crown without ever drawing a dagger, and for goodness sakes, don't remove everything interesting about a living, breathing world just because your marketing suits are telling you to not frustrate the cashcows.
PFO is a sandbox mmorpg; it has other RPG systems described in the Goblin Works Blog.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I guess, we'll have to consider HOW magic can integrate with other systems, ie non-combat (which seems the majority of spells)?
Eg Alignment, Settlement (eg protection), Travel, Perception (Planes/supernatural), Divination (Time/Fate), Items (seems a big possibility), Suggestion (eg persuasion: get a better deal!).
I don't know what other role magic can subsume:
Eg engineering, weather - crops (fight disease) -> food (increase positive effects).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Marketing suits? Which site did you mean to post this on? :p. GW, unless I'm very mistaken, has no dedicated marketing people.Actually Ryan's job at CCP was as head of Marketing. He's the marketing guy, it may not be his official title, but he is.
He's said in the past, around the discussion table, a marketing person has a place at the table. The trouble with RPGs: Mature genre with passionate fans and no clear definition ie one extreme: Turn-based tactical, at the other hack'n'slash and in-between sort of successful (found big a market ;) ) in-between type rpg-hybrids such as Mass Effect. RPGs have big shoes to fill, especially as the table-top games are usually really strong games/inspirations, themselves.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Marketing folks don't know anything about making GAMES. They're only interested in profits. We don't give a s~%+ about your profits. So give us a good GAME.
MUDs were a great mix of PvE and PvP and some of the best RP I have witnessed in almost thirty years of gaming over three continents. You could go play one of those. Barring the fact none of those really made a profit and they're mostly extinct now apart from a few niche games.
Marketing folks don't know anything about making GAMES. They're only interested in profits. We don't give a s~%+ about your profits. So give us a good GAME.MUDs were a great mix of PvE and PvP and some of the best RP I have witnessed in almost thirty years of gaming over three continents. You could go play one of those. Barring the fact none of those really made a profit and they're mostly extinct now apart from a few niche games.
But hey, least they wouldn't have to worry about those pesky marketing types spoiling the game!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Though not a PvP player, I believe that what you're able to do to the poor, hapless monster, you need to be able to do to the player as well. Does that mean some PvPers who are used to playing in games where they're somewhat protected by the system are going to be unhappy when another player tosses that same nasty fireball in their direction and kills them - sure. But GW has already made it clear that this isn't a game you're likely going to get very far in without other people, so that fireball tossing mage might kill you, but your friends might then kill him.
You're never going to create a system that pleases everyone. All you can hope to do is be clear about the system you're making, about the types of players you're making it for, and follow through with what you've promised. If big bad Mr. Fighter is that upset, he obviously chose the wrong game. He can learn to modify his expectations and his play-style to suit the game he chose, or find one more in keeping with his expectations and play-style. If he had taken the time to research the game, he could have avoided the problem.
