3rd May 2004, 5:00 PM
(This post was last modified: 3rd May 2004, 5:15 PM by A Black Falcon.)
Um, DJ, I don't think there is ANY D&D with "Magic Points". That would go totally against everything the D&D magic system stands for! The fact that those idiotic action games ('idiotic' not because they are terrible but because they so flagrantly break the rules) have magic... so stupid... (that is, Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance 1 and 2) Seriously, I disliked the fact that they broke the rules most about that game. If it hadn't been D&D I might have actually liked it more...
Anyway, the way it works is you can cast spells. Your spellbook (seperate spell lists for Mages and Clerics) has a limited number of spells per level (7 levels of Cleric spells, 9 Mage -- slowly getting better as you go up) they can know. Then, you choose which ones you want to memorize. You have a limited number of spell slots for each level of spells, and can only pick spells from that level for the memorized spells from that level... like, for Clerics IMO they have nothing good on level 2, but you just have to live with filling spots with un-useful spells because those are the only ones you can put there. Oh, you can put as many copies of each spell in those slots as you want... but that's all you get until your next rest. When your party rests, your mages and clerics learn each memorized spell. They can use each memorized spell (or multiple copies of a spell, but that takes up slots same as the first) once. Once used, that one is gone from your memorized list until you rest again. Simple, and great, system... I love it. Of course, the fact that there are some very cool spells helps too... :)
I choose bastard swords above longswords (both are in the 'Longsword' proficiency category) because they probably do do more damage overall, you're right... I was just saying that there IS an advantage, in a way, to the Longsword as well...
Oh, and I did say that I wished they made the true numbers more clear -- I can't do all that math myself, especially when I don't even know how the game really calculates it!
You really just have to go with what you see as damage on the screen (since, in most of these games, it shows your damage numbers after each hit).
I have no idea about what you mean by 'getting far into it to defeat one of the key parts of the system'... you said something similar before. What do you mean?
As for the rest, as I said, chance plays a role but your character and their stats, and the nature of who you are fighting, plays at least as much of one. So both if you hit and damage are (seperate) dice rolls. So? So once in a while you miss... you attack many times, and you'll hit eventually... it's not like one attack is a make-or-break chance of hit or die! If nothing else you can always run... but you overemphasize chance. You win because of good tactics and characters and equipment that are of a level with your opponents, not luck... at least, if you're relying on luck you won't win that much!
Well, not a board game per se, because there isn't a board... it's a pen and paper game. :) and 'originally'? It's CURRENTLY! D&D 3.0 just came out a few years ago...
As for the rest... well, I don't know... either you don't understand D&D (which I very highly suspect is the case, given your comments on magic!)
Umm... are you saying that in KOTOR you can improve your base stats (the six main stats I mentioned)? Not with items I mean, but the actual stats? The only game I've ever heard of where THAT is allowed (in D&D) is Torment, and that's just for your main character and has a very good story explanation for it. But otherwise... I'd like to presume you meant with items... the way D&D works is that you make choices, right at the start when you create your character. Oh, character creation... that should take a long time. An hour, perhaps? Quite possible, there are a lot of choices and they are permanant and are absolutely vital to how the game plays. Mess up on setting your six main stats and it's a permanant issue you'll have to deal with or restart over. And that's the way it should be in a D&D game.
Oh, and you shouldn't be getting belts of 18 charisma until quite far into a game... :)
And finally. Umm, how else should an RPG work? Would you prefer that you hit every time? I mean, how are you going to deal with armor class? You need some kind of check in a game like this to see if you hit -- you can't hit every time you swing. Should it just be a straight check of AC-vs.-whatever-replaced-THAC0? But by that measure my level 17 ranger (umm, that's my character at the end of BGII... you start at level 7 or 8, you see...) with a negative THAC0 would hit most enemies virtually every time who are weaker and would almost never hit stronger ones... that would be boring! And Dragons would be even harder...
Same with saving throws. Okay, I cast Web. How do you propose that the game checks to see if the people in the way get caught? You HAVE to have some kind of random value involved somewhere! Otherwise it'd be a tedious job of 'Web will stick everyone with a magic resistance of, say, 3 or more. Anything less and you'll never stick'. That'd be stupid!
Look, you're missing some obvious points. D&D has a very complex combat system. It isn't two lines of unmoving people like a console RPG! It's a battle in the world. You have to deal with distance. You have ranged and close weapons. You have different numbers of attacks per round based on how strong your characters are and which weapons you have. And, of course, you have magic, and the massive variety that ads... (I like magic. That's why my BG2 party had three mages and a cleric (one of those a multiclassed Cleric-Mage)...) Oh, console RPGs have depth in strategy in combat too, but in a dramatically different way. YOu don't have to deal with these things or if you do it's totally out of your hands (like in Skies of Arcadia -- area of effect is there but not being able to control where you fire from!). Simple.
But with D&D, how else could you possibly do it BUT with random rolls, that are hugely affected by your (and your target's) character stats? It's the ONLY way!
And as I said. Your stats matter just as much as the roll itsself. With that Web I talked about, the rolls themselves may be random but overall they will, because of randomness, hit some kind of median that'll be in the middle. Average half higher, half lower. And the person with the high throws will lose. They'll be stuck for a long time. Same with that guy of yours with 3 intelligence... :D Anyway, the person who is high level will get free faster. Just like because of their low to hit they'll hit you a lot sooner no matter what your armor class is. Or if not sooner, far more often. Your dislike of probability here seems to me kind of missing the forest for the trees...
For instance, hitting. If, in like most console RPGs, almost every time you swing you hit, you WOULD need those console-style 'massive HP numbers' games! You'd do damage so fast that battle would be over in seconds! D&D isn't about that, unless you're beating up on something far weaker than you are (like, level 15 people killing kobolds... :D)... you MUST miss at least as often as you hit and maybe more. The game would not work any other way. So, how do you decide that? Like with the Web spell, there is no other sane way to do it other than a greatly influenced series of dice rolls ('series', as in 'roll for to hit', 'roll for damage'... several rolls, each influenced hugely by stats. You won't win or lose combats based on random chance very often!)
As for the damage itsself being a die roll, you know, it's like Warcraft vs Starcraft... in one you have damage ranges, the other set numbers. For each, that way works, and it could work either way. A range introduces uncertainty (and a die roll is the same as a range...), true, but it allows for easier depiction of things like critical hits (with single-number you either don't have such a thing or you have some ... other ... way of finding them...)...
D&D could have decided to have a longsword do 5 damage instead of a d8 roll. But I'd take the d8 every time. Much better, and, you know, more accurate too... people don't attack with the same strength every time! And as I said over the course of time it WILL balance out, so any minor unfairness from a few bad rolls will be not very important pretty quickly.
And anyway, if it's a PC game, you can always save, and should often. You can always lose a battle (and luck (of a roll) isn't the deciding factor pretty much ever... bad strategy, generally, will do you in though.).
Oh, I thought of something. Console RPGs. Okay, why don't the badguys use their best abilities over and over again? You can! But they don't. They resort to patterns, often, or something like that. Now, I'll admit that in the D&D games they don't use ALL the spells, but at least once you get far you'll fight many enemies who are mages and use all kinds of spells... attack, defence, etc... it's a game, really -- can you disable their spell protections faster than they can put them up? Do you have the right spells memorized to take down their barriers? You don't face this until your party gets very strong (like, in BG1 it's about armor, not spell protections much... just a few invisibility things will do...), but as you get stronger the mages get more and more cool stuff...
Anyway, the way it works is you can cast spells. Your spellbook (seperate spell lists for Mages and Clerics) has a limited number of spells per level (7 levels of Cleric spells, 9 Mage -- slowly getting better as you go up) they can know. Then, you choose which ones you want to memorize. You have a limited number of spell slots for each level of spells, and can only pick spells from that level for the memorized spells from that level... like, for Clerics IMO they have nothing good on level 2, but you just have to live with filling spots with un-useful spells because those are the only ones you can put there. Oh, you can put as many copies of each spell in those slots as you want... but that's all you get until your next rest. When your party rests, your mages and clerics learn each memorized spell. They can use each memorized spell (or multiple copies of a spell, but that takes up slots same as the first) once. Once used, that one is gone from your memorized list until you rest again. Simple, and great, system... I love it. Of course, the fact that there are some very cool spells helps too... :)
Quote:Anyway, the math aside, it's still all based on probability. It's not having to solve equtations that's a problem. KOTOR for example did all the equations for you and you never had to do any of the math yourself (I love science, but I really do not enjoy math, well not the actual DOING of the math, though I enjoy complicated math principles and rules). It would basically just tell you, as you put it above, how much damage the weapon could potentially do. Rolling 2 four sided really IS better odds than a single 8 sided. I'd always pick that anyway, and it generally was evenly distributed between 2 and 8, never really gathering up on either side of it.
I choose bastard swords above longswords (both are in the 'Longsword' proficiency category) because they probably do do more damage overall, you're right... I was just saying that there IS an advantage, in a way, to the Longsword as well...
Oh, and I did say that I wished they made the true numbers more clear -- I can't do all that math myself, especially when I don't even know how the game really calculates it!
You really just have to go with what you see as damage on the screen (since, in most of these games, it shows your damage numbers after each hit).
Quote:Sorry ABF, but playing with probabilities is utterly boring to me and in the end when chance is the supreme factor, I don't decide things. Yes, as you said, and I pointed out above, when you get significantly stronger, you WILL win more often because the 20 variable just isn't as significant a change, but to be forced to play a long way into a game just to defeat one of the key parts of the system just isn't enjoyable to me. Chance is not fun for me at all, and I've always despised elements that are random rather than controlled by me. When I win early on, I never feel like I earned it, just that I was lucky.
I have no idea about what you mean by 'getting far into it to defeat one of the key parts of the system'... you said something similar before. What do you mean?
As for the rest, as I said, chance plays a role but your character and their stats, and the nature of who you are fighting, plays at least as much of one. So both if you hit and damage are (seperate) dice rolls. So? So once in a while you miss... you attack many times, and you'll hit eventually... it's not like one attack is a make-or-break chance of hit or die! If nothing else you can always run... but you overemphasize chance. You win because of good tactics and characters and equipment that are of a level with your opponents, not luck... at least, if you're relying on luck you won't win that much!
Quote:Now, I understand this was apparently originally a board game, and as such die were involved, but honestly I don't care. The fact is, I just don't enjoy it. Games of chance are fine I suppose when I'm in the mood for just random chance to take part, but I'm always fully aware that if I win, it's not because of anything I did. When playing an RPG, I don't want that sort of feeling. I want the satisfaction of knowing I and I alone was responsible for the victory, or my defeat should that be the case, so I know that I can actually do something different to win, or that my strategies were in fact good. A little probability adds some spice indeed, but probability shouldn't be set in stone, and it shouldn't have as major an effect on the battle. For example, having a weapon that is super strong but has an inherent 40% hit rate I can deal with. It's that the hit rate is ALSO calculated into some huge unchangeble variable that will have a MAJOR effect on the battle's outcome no matter how I play it that's the problem. I don't even mind when there are a FEW moves that are totally chance related. Having some move like "roulette" that instantly kills a totally random character, including the one who cast the spell, is fine.
Well, not a board game per se, because there isn't a board... it's a pen and paper game. :) and 'originally'? It's CURRENTLY! D&D 3.0 just came out a few years ago...
As for the rest... well, I don't know... either you don't understand D&D (which I very highly suspect is the case, given your comments on magic!)
Quote:I guess it's hard to explain, but basically it's like I said above. A LITTLE probability can add some "spice" to the game, but when a game completely depends on probability, it just gets annoying. I mean, the number of times I just reset for the first part of KOTOR after dying in a battle, even though I had a very nice level and some good equipment and abilities and such, and then I suddenly just TOTALLY kill the enemy without them standing a chance, was just too much. It ALSO frustrated me in conversations where I was "perseuading" people. Again, later on the stats got so high that the 20 variable didn't really matter as MOST of the time I would succeed, but when it's about 50/50, it's just annoying. I like to know that it's set in stone so that I know if it's totally impossible or completely doable, not know that I have a chance so I end up resetting over and over again until it works.
Umm... are you saying that in KOTOR you can improve your base stats (the six main stats I mentioned)? Not with items I mean, but the actual stats? The only game I've ever heard of where THAT is allowed (in D&D) is Torment, and that's just for your main character and has a very good story explanation for it. But otherwise... I'd like to presume you meant with items... the way D&D works is that you make choices, right at the start when you create your character. Oh, character creation... that should take a long time. An hour, perhaps? Quite possible, there are a lot of choices and they are permanant and are absolutely vital to how the game plays. Mess up on setting your six main stats and it's a permanant issue you'll have to deal with or restart over. And that's the way it should be in a D&D game.
Oh, and you shouldn't be getting belts of 18 charisma until quite far into a game... :)
And finally. Umm, how else should an RPG work? Would you prefer that you hit every time? I mean, how are you going to deal with armor class? You need some kind of check in a game like this to see if you hit -- you can't hit every time you swing. Should it just be a straight check of AC-vs.-whatever-replaced-THAC0? But by that measure my level 17 ranger (umm, that's my character at the end of BGII... you start at level 7 or 8, you see...) with a negative THAC0 would hit most enemies virtually every time who are weaker and would almost never hit stronger ones... that would be boring! And Dragons would be even harder...
Same with saving throws. Okay, I cast Web. How do you propose that the game checks to see if the people in the way get caught? You HAVE to have some kind of random value involved somewhere! Otherwise it'd be a tedious job of 'Web will stick everyone with a magic resistance of, say, 3 or more. Anything less and you'll never stick'. That'd be stupid!
Look, you're missing some obvious points. D&D has a very complex combat system. It isn't two lines of unmoving people like a console RPG! It's a battle in the world. You have to deal with distance. You have ranged and close weapons. You have different numbers of attacks per round based on how strong your characters are and which weapons you have. And, of course, you have magic, and the massive variety that ads... (I like magic. That's why my BG2 party had three mages and a cleric (one of those a multiclassed Cleric-Mage)...) Oh, console RPGs have depth in strategy in combat too, but in a dramatically different way. YOu don't have to deal with these things or if you do it's totally out of your hands (like in Skies of Arcadia -- area of effect is there but not being able to control where you fire from!). Simple.
But with D&D, how else could you possibly do it BUT with random rolls, that are hugely affected by your (and your target's) character stats? It's the ONLY way!
And as I said. Your stats matter just as much as the roll itsself. With that Web I talked about, the rolls themselves may be random but overall they will, because of randomness, hit some kind of median that'll be in the middle. Average half higher, half lower. And the person with the high throws will lose. They'll be stuck for a long time. Same with that guy of yours with 3 intelligence... :D Anyway, the person who is high level will get free faster. Just like because of their low to hit they'll hit you a lot sooner no matter what your armor class is. Or if not sooner, far more often. Your dislike of probability here seems to me kind of missing the forest for the trees...
For instance, hitting. If, in like most console RPGs, almost every time you swing you hit, you WOULD need those console-style 'massive HP numbers' games! You'd do damage so fast that battle would be over in seconds! D&D isn't about that, unless you're beating up on something far weaker than you are (like, level 15 people killing kobolds... :D)... you MUST miss at least as often as you hit and maybe more. The game would not work any other way. So, how do you decide that? Like with the Web spell, there is no other sane way to do it other than a greatly influenced series of dice rolls ('series', as in 'roll for to hit', 'roll for damage'... several rolls, each influenced hugely by stats. You won't win or lose combats based on random chance very often!)
As for the damage itsself being a die roll, you know, it's like Warcraft vs Starcraft... in one you have damage ranges, the other set numbers. For each, that way works, and it could work either way. A range introduces uncertainty (and a die roll is the same as a range...), true, but it allows for easier depiction of things like critical hits (with single-number you either don't have such a thing or you have some ... other ... way of finding them...)...
D&D could have decided to have a longsword do 5 damage instead of a d8 roll. But I'd take the d8 every time. Much better, and, you know, more accurate too... people don't attack with the same strength every time! And as I said over the course of time it WILL balance out, so any minor unfairness from a few bad rolls will be not very important pretty quickly.
And anyway, if it's a PC game, you can always save, and should often. You can always lose a battle (and luck (of a roll) isn't the deciding factor pretty much ever... bad strategy, generally, will do you in though.).
Oh, I thought of something. Console RPGs. Okay, why don't the badguys use their best abilities over and over again? You can! But they don't. They resort to patterns, often, or something like that. Now, I'll admit that in the D&D games they don't use ALL the spells, but at least once you get far you'll fight many enemies who are mages and use all kinds of spells... attack, defence, etc... it's a game, really -- can you disable their spell protections faster than they can put them up? Do you have the right spells memorized to take down their barriers? You don't face this until your party gets very strong (like, in BG1 it's about armor, not spell protections much... just a few invisibility things will do...), but as you get stronger the mages get more and more cool stuff...