I'm huge fan of them in games - both in dialoques as well as in environmental situations. I know that warriors will be able to bash some walls and they'll crumble if they have enough strenght. Will we be able to see more of that? Obviously i'm not talking about perception system and skills that are specifically designed for doing certain action, but rather a byproduct of having high attribute and side effect of skill.
I would Really hope that a game that has a lazer focus on Grouping, friendships, reputation, and general comaraderie would never put WoW-Like Gear / Stat checks that would make people Not want to accept you into a group.
EQ had Very little "gear checks" except for Elitist Raiding. Like the last few isles in Plane of Air. Maybe a CZ fight.
Any "class" that can break walls, should be able to break walls. There shouldn't be an artificial "stat check" to prevent me from getting a group. The game is being designed to Not be able to solo (well )
The game Requires a group. Putting walls up to block grouping is counterintuitive to the game design.
So, my vote is No. Stat and gear checks should be left to WoW, not Pantheon.
Flapp said:I would Really hope that a game that has a lazer focus on Grouping, friendships, reputation, and general comaraderie would never put WoW-Like Gear / Stat checks that would make people Not want to accept you into a group.
EQ had Very little "gear checks" except for Elitist Raiding. Like the last few isles in Plane of Air. Maybe a CZ fight.
Any "class" that can break walls, should be able to break walls. There shouldn't be an artificial "stat check" to prevent me from getting a group. The game is being designed to Not be able to solo (well )
The game Requires a group. Putting walls up to block grouping is counterintuitive to the game design.
So, my vote is No. Stat and gear checks should be left to WoW, not Pantheon.
I belieive he was talking about bonus options based on a certain wisdom score or lore skill or what not. Though by dismissing the perception system it kinda undercuts the very idea since a perception system would be a nice way to jazz up skill checks and make them less mechanical. I do not believe he was talking about things like GearScore...
I wasn't talking about GearScore and alike, but as Furyfist pointed lore/environment oriented mechanic. I doubt we could find anyone in this forum who would want GearScore in Pantheon xP
I think that if you start adding stat checks to abilities that are designed to bypass obstacles, then you run the risk of limiting a player's ability to get into groups.
I understand how this could be used as a "gate" to prevent say a level 20 group from venturing into a level 30+ area, however, I am all for player freedom as long as it is within reason. I think that if a level 20 group was to venture into a level 30+ area then its a good learning experience for them, while still promoting aspects of exploration and curiosity within the game.
Hard rules like you can't do X because your Thing Doer stat isn't high enough is just lazy game design.
I think it's reasonable to say a level 20 character will have a really hard time accessing level 30 content, and likely won't be very effective against it. There are points on ability curves where things just aren't possible or are extremely unlikely to be successful. That's fine and makes sense.
The Wisdom Dungeon requires a Wisdom of 9000 to enter is just lame.
I would much rather see the ability to bash walls be a natural part of your Warrior's progression and content needing you to bash walls occurs after the point you can be reasonably expected to have attained that ability.
Otherwise you end up fostering a culture of players not being 1337 enough to play with others because their numbers aren't high enough.
I have just picked up DDO, and already ran into a few spots where my character couldn't go because of lack of strength (couldn't open/break the door) or intelligence (couldn't use the rune required to open the door). I think that is actually a nice and realistic touch. And such obstacles likely won't stop groups, but they can stop soloers, and that is actually not a bad thing IMO.
Sarim said:I have just picked up DDO, and already ran into a few spots where my character couldn't go because of lack of strength (couldn't open/break the door) or intelligence (couldn't use the rune required to open the door). I think that is actually a nice and realistic touch. And such obstacles likely won't stop groups, but they can stop soloers, and that is actually not a bad thing IMO.
It won't stop groups, but it will stop you getting invited to groups if you're the class that is supposed to have that stat but your stat isn't high enough.
That is not a good thing.
Sarim said:I have just picked up DDO, and already ran into a few spots where my character couldn't go because of lack of strength (couldn't open/break the door) or intelligence (couldn't use the rune required to open the door). I think that is actually a nice and realistic touch. And such obstacles likely won't stop groups, but they can stop soloers, and that is actually not a bad thing IMO.
I agree, I think.
Supposedly, Pantheon will be just as much about overcoming the environment as about defeating mobs, so a wall too thick for you to break makes perfect sense.
It has it's place, provided characters that can't have STR super high can buff it. Like, if Clerics are supposed to be +WIS, and have 8 STR, but fighters are at 16 STR, but the stat check is 18, and the cleric can improve STR by two, at the intended content level? Makes sense that a cleric-buffed-fighter would pass that check.
Potions, gear, scrolls, might also let you.. depends on design goals.
But personally, I am all in favor of doing everything possible to limit solo access to areas that designers intend to be group only, at their intended level.
However, it should be noted that.. due to historically proven stat-bloat and designer-craziness, even a level 50 wizard might pass a level 10 STR check, right? For some insane reason, designers keep putting non-primary stats on class-bound or class-specific gear. So, if the intent is to block the level 50 solo wizard from gaining access to a "group-only" area to farm level 10 bosses.. this might not or probably won't do that.
As far as destructibles go, I'm all in favor, provided the implementation is done is such a way that each group gets to experience the destructible wall, unless you are willing to accept that 18 groups of adventurers are simly going to keep that wall ~permanently destroyed and it's a bit of a failed gimmick. You can do it 'a' right way, but the latter may be the reality, without appropriate consideration.
vjek said:It has it's place, provided characters that can't have STR super high can buff it. Like, if Clerics are supposed to be +WIS, and have 8 STR, but fighters are at 16 STR, but the stat check is 18, and the cleric can improve STR by two, at the intended content level? Makes sense that a cleric-buffed-fighter would pass that check.
Potions, gear, scrolls, might also let you.. depends on design goals.
But personally, I am all in favor of doing everything possible to limit solo access to areas that designers intend to be group only, at their intended level.
However, it should be noted that.. due to historically proven stat-bloat and designer-craziness, even a level 50 wizard might pass a level 10 STR check, right? For some insane reason, designers keep putting non-primary stats on class-bound or class-specific gear. So, if the intent is to block the level 50 solo wizard from gaining access to a "group-only" area to farm level 10 bosses.. this might not or probably won't do that.
As far as destructibles go, I'm all in favor, provided the implementation is done is such a way that each group gets to experience the destructible wall, unless you are willing to accept that 18 groups of adventurers are simly going to keep that wall ~permanently destroyed and it's a bit of a failed gimmick. You can do it 'a' right way, but the latter may be the reality, without appropriate consideration.
I really liked your thoughts on this. I get what the OP is saying. In my head, I had dumbed it down to an artificial stat check. (which is jus one step away from Gear score)
But, I get it more the way you said it. Needing a group (buff) to reach X goal to get to an area intended for a group that would pass that check. Clever.
Flapp said:I really liked your thoughts on this. I get what the OP is saying. In my head, I had dumbed it down to an artificial stat check. (which is jus one step away from Gear score)
But, I get it more the way you said it. Needing a group (buff) to reach X goal to get to an area intended for a group that would pass that check. Clever.
I think things like this go against the stated goal of not prohibiting soloing, just not desiging for it. It's all well and good to promote grouping, or design things with a group in mind, but when you make it impossible to do things without a group, you are failing to plan for the inevitable future when someone is eventually going to have no choice but to try and do things without a group.
Some people like soloing encounters for the challenge. Not everyone who solos from time to time is antisocial. I really oppose the idea of forcing people to group. I don't want a WoW-style game where you can solo everything easily and therefore never even think about grouping, but if someone wants to try to solo things I don't see any good reason to say they aren't allowed to.
Chanus said:Sarim said:I have just picked up DDO, and already ran into a few spots where my character couldn't go because of lack of strength (couldn't open/break the door) or intelligence (couldn't use the rune required to open the door). I think that is actually a nice and realistic touch. And such obstacles likely won't stop groups, but they can stop soloers, and that is actually not a bad thing IMO.
It won't stop groups, but it will stop you getting invited to groups if you're the class that is supposed to have that stat but your stat isn't high enough.
That is not a good thing.
It didn't stop them, because if you were the right class that had that stat reaching it was extremely easy, and you should be completely past it at the level you reach it, all it really did is make it to where you couldn't just solo the whole game and try to get everything someone who grp can get.
Flapp said:vjek said:It has it's place, provided characters that can't have STR super high can buff it. Like, if Clerics are supposed to be +WIS, and have 8 STR, but fighters are at 16 STR, but the stat check is 18, and the cleric can improve STR by two, at the intended content level? Makes sense that a cleric-buffed-fighter would pass that check.
Potions, gear, scrolls, might also let you.. depends on design goals.
But personally, I am all in favor of doing everything possible to limit solo access to areas that designers intend to be group only, at their intended level.
However, it should be noted that.. due to historically proven stat-bloat and designer-craziness, even a level 50 wizard might pass a level 10 STR check, right? For some insane reason, designers keep putting non-primary stats on class-bound or class-specific gear. So, if the intent is to block the level 50 solo wizard from gaining access to a "group-only" area to farm level 10 bosses.. this might not or probably won't do that.
As far as destructibles go, I'm all in favor, provided the implementation is done is such a way that each group gets to experience the destructible wall, unless you are willing to accept that 18 groups of adventurers are simly going to keep that wall ~permanently destroyed and it's a bit of a failed gimmick. You can do it 'a' right way, but the latter may be the reality, without appropriate consideration.I really liked your thoughts on this. I get what the OP is saying. In my head, I had dumbed it down to an artificial stat check. (which is jus one step away from Gear score)
But, I get it more the way you said it. Needing a group (buff) to reach X goal to get to an area intended for a group that would pass that check. Clever.
I think to honestly deal with this the best is to not let strength influence the amount of weight you can carry but another stay that simply effect it independently. That way a wizard would never and should never get a strength stay so the checks always have a place.
Chanus said:Flapp said:I really liked your thoughts on this. I get what the OP is saying. In my head, I had dumbed it down to an artificial stat check. (which is jus one step away from Gear score)
But, I get it more the way you said it. Needing a group (buff) to reach X goal to get to an area intended for a group that would pass that check. Clever.
I think things like this go against the stated goal of not prohibiting soloing, just not desiging for it. It's all well and good to promote grouping, or design things with a group in mind, but when you make it impossible to do things without a group, you are failing to plan for the inevitable future when someone is eventually going to have no choice but to try and do things without a group.
Some people like soloing encounters for the challenge. Not everyone who solos from time to time is antisocial. I really oppose the idea of forcing people to group. I don't want a WoW-style game where you can solo everything easily and therefore never even think about grouping, but if someone wants to try to solo things I don't see any good reason to say they aren't allowed to.
You aren't stopping them from soloing, you are stopping the from soloing in dungeons, fortresses, castles, and other spots that were specifically made for groups, you can still solo in wide open spaces, and other areas that probably will be more for the solo able content, you don't need to be able to solo everywhere just because it seems better that way, even though to me it defiantly doesnt.
Riahuf22 said:Chanus said:Sarim said:I have just picked up DDO, and already ran into a few spots where my character couldn't go because of lack of strength (couldn't open/break the door) or intelligence (couldn't use the rune required to open the door). I think that is actually a nice and realistic touch. And such obstacles likely won't stop groups, but they can stop soloers, and that is actually not a bad thing IMO.
It won't stop groups, but it will stop you getting invited to groups if you're the class that is supposed to have that stat but your stat isn't high enough.
That is not a good thing.
It didn't stop them, because if you were the right class that had that stat reaching it was extremely easy, and you should be completely past it at the level you reach it, all it really did is make it to where you couldn't just solo the whole game and try to get everything someone who grp can get.
If you lock people out of content arbitrarily just because you want them to play the game the same way you want to play the game, do you think they are more likely to play the game your way or to just not play the game at all?
Chanus said:Riahuf22 said:Chanus said:Sarim said:I have just picked up DDO, and already ran into a few spots where my character couldn't go because of lack of strength (couldn't open/break the door) or intelligence (couldn't use the rune required to open the door). I think that is actually a nice and realistic touch. And such obstacles likely won't stop groups, but they can stop soloers, and that is actually not a bad thing IMO.
It won't stop groups, but it will stop you getting invited to groups if you're the class that is supposed to have that stat but your stat isn't high enough.
That is not a good thing.
It didn't stop them, because if you were the right class that had that stat reaching it was extremely easy, and you should be completely past it at the level you reach it, all it really did is make it to where you couldn't just solo the whole game and try to get everything someone who grp can get.
If you lock people out of content arbitrarily just because you want them to play the game the same way you want to play the game, do you think they are more likely to play the game your way or to just not play the game at all?
It's a MMORPG in my opinion it's main function is to highly influence people to grp up and socialize with people, so again if you went and bought a MMORPG and only wanted to solo most of the time than in my opinion you bought the wrong type of game.
Plus it will give you the chance to go to other content you also missed by going to another zone that will give you appropriate gear to unlock the gear check to discover more content, it's not a bad system, just encourages you to grp up like you should want to do in a MMORPG to begin with.
I mean, if this is the first you're hearing that some people prefer to play solo a lot of the time, I don't know what to tell you.
Influencing people to group and forcing people to group or not experience content are two different approaches. The first is perfectly fine, and something I agree with! The second is just a way to ensure a subset of people decide not to play your game at all.
Plenty of solo players are also active community members. I'm one! I prefer to solo a lot of the time because I am focused on specific tasks, but I am still participating in chat during those times. If people have questions about content and I know the answer, I offer it. If people cross my path with the same goal I have, I'll invite them to group with me. I don't see why I should be prohibited from content because sometimes my primary goal is not playing directly with other people.
I am 100% for the game encouraging grouping with other players. Have grouping be the most efficient way to complete tasks. Have xp in a group be significantly better than solo xp. Have loot drop chances increase by the amount of people in your group.
What I am against is arbitrary gatekeeping that requires you to group for no other purpose than, "I think people should want to group, so I will force them to."
Chanus said:I mean, if this is the first you're hearing that some people prefer to play solo a lot of the time, I don't know what to tell you.
Influencing people to group and forcing people to group or not experience content are two different approaches. The first is perfectly fine, and something I agree with! The second is just a way to ensure a subset of people decide not to play your game at all.
Plenty of solo players are also active community members. I'm one! I prefer to solo a lot of the time because I am focused on specific tasks, but I am still participating in chat during those times. If people have questions about content and I know the answer, I offer it. If people cross my path with the same goal I have, I'll invite them to group with me. I don't see why I should be prohibited from content because sometimes my primary goal is not playing directly with other people.
I am 100% for the game encouraging grouping with other players. Have grouping be the most efficient way to complete tasks. Have xp in a group be significantly better than solo xp. Have loot drop chances increase by the amount of people in your group.
What I am against is arbitrary gatekeeping that requires you to group for no other purpose than, "I think people should want to group, so I will force them to."
This.
Chanus said:I mean, if this is the first you're hearing that some people prefer to play solo a lot of the time, I don't know what to tell you.
Influencing people to group and forcing people to group or not experience content are two different approaches. The first is perfectly fine, and something I agree with! The second is just a way to ensure a subset of people decide not to play your game at all.
Plenty of solo players are also active community members. I'm one! I prefer to solo a lot of the time because I am focused on specific tasks, but I am still participating in chat during those times. If people have questions about content and I know the answer, I offer it. If people cross my path with the same goal I have, I'll invite them to group with me. I don't see why I should be prohibited from content because sometimes my primary goal is not playing directly with other people.
I am 100% for the game encouraging grouping with other players. Have grouping be the most efficient way to complete tasks. Have xp in a group be significantly better than solo xp. Have loot drop chances increase by the amount of people in your group.
What I am against is arbitrary gatekeeping that requires you to group for no other purpose than, "I think people should want to group, so I will force them to."
It's not forcing you to group though, it making it to where if you want to solo their will be plenty of places to do that, just not in specific places where a grp is needed, not only because of the skill checks but because the difficulty of the place also shouldn't be solo able to begin with.
I'm not saying you can't solo, in fact I'm in favor of having soloing content in the game but being able to solo and being able to solo everywhere is completely different, I mean not even WoW allows you to be able to solo everywhere and we want a harder game than that so why should we allow anyone to solo anywhere and go everywhere without any effort?
Riahuf22 said:It's not forcing you to group though, it making it to where if you want to solo their will be plenty of places to do that, just not in specific places where a grp is needed, not only because of the skill checks but because the difficulty of the place also shouldn't be solo able to begin with.
I'm not saying you can't solo, in fact I'm in favor of having soloing content in the game but being able to solo and being able to solo everywhere is completely different, I mean not even WoW allows you to be able to solo everywhere and we want a harder game than that so why should we allow anyone to solo anywhere and go everywhere without any effort?
I didn't say one should be able to go everywhere and solo anywhere without any effort.
I said one should not be arbitrarily prevented from going anywhere simply because you think people should want to group together.
If the content itself is too challenging for me to solo it, that is totally fine. The challenge shouldn't be my Strength stat is too low to get through a wall. That's not actually a challenge.
Chanus said:Riahuf22 said:It's not forcing you to group though, it making it to where if you want to solo their will be plenty of places to do that, just not in specific places where a grp is needed, not only because of the skill checks but because the difficulty of the place also shouldn't be solo able to begin with.
I'm not saying you can't solo, in fact I'm in favor of having soloing content in the game but being able to solo and being able to solo everywhere is completely different, I mean not even WoW allows you to be able to solo everywhere and we want a harder game than that so why should we allow anyone to solo anywhere and go everywhere without any effort?
I didn't say one should be able to go everywhere and solo anywhere without any effort.
I said one should not be arbitrarily prevented from going anywhere simply because you think people should want to group together.
If the content itself is too challenging for me to solo it, that is totally fine. The challenge shouldn't be my Strength stat is too low to get through a wall. That's not actually a challenge.
The way you seeing this feature and how's used is completely different.it isnt in solo content, they use it in dungeons or instances and they have it to where even if you "could" solo it you wouldn't be able to get everything their without a group because it was in tented for a grp to complete. And I believe for as long as the places that could have something like this in places where it was intended for groups, than I see nothing wrong with it.
There should be no such thing as solo content or group content, there should just be: Content. People can then figure out how to do that content as best they can. If a level 4 necro can do something that would require a pally to be level 6, that's fine. If a monk/shaman team at level 33 are doing content that a group of 5 level 27 players are doing, that's fine.
If there are mechanics in the world that make doing certain areas, where you would otherwise be strong enough, difficult or near impossible solo, that's fine too. Imbalance is part of balance. People will make their way through the world without being dictated to as to what they can do based on whether they are solo or in a group. There will be some enchanter who mezzes her way through some "group only" content to solo some spot in a dungeon. That is going to be awesome emergent gameplay that will be destroyed if we're forced onto rails.
If there's some puzzle door that will only open when 2 players step on a certain part of the floor in the room at the same time and third one has to run through and flip the door switch on the other side, cool. But generally speaking, imo, gameplay design that straight up locks people out of certain areas is not a great idea. If we're strong/smart/experienced/industrious/lucky enough to do the content, let us do it.
And, to address the OP since we're way OT as usual, I think we'll see stat/skill requirements, but to me "check" means there's some kind of roll. The perception system, climbing and things like the environmental abilities that certain classes have(warrior breaking a wall, rogue throwing a rope, etc) could fall into that category as well. But this isn't the "skill check" kind of game, by the semantics I define in my head.
Keno Monster said:There should be no such thing as solo content or group content, there should just be: Content. People can then figure out how to do that content as best they can. If a level 4 necro can do something that would require a pally to be level 6, that's fine. If a monk/shaman team at level 33 are doing content that a group of 5 level 27 players are doing, that's fine.
If there are mechanics in the world that make doing certain areas, where you would otherwise be strong enough, difficult or near impossible solo, that's fine too. Imbalance is part of balance. People will make their way through the world without being dictated to as to what they can do based on whether they are solo or in a group. There will be some enchanter who mezzes her way through some "group only" content to solo some spot in a dungeon. That is going to be awesome emergent gameplay that will be destroyed if we're forced onto rails.
If there's some puzzle door that will only open when 2 players step on a certain part of the floor in the room at the same time and third one has to run through and flip the door switch on the other side, cool. But generally speaking, imo, gameplay design that straight up locks people out of certain areas is not a great idea. If we're strong/smart/experienced/industrious/lucky enough to do the content, let us do it.
And, to address the OP since we're way OT as usual, I think we'll see stat/skill requirements, but to me "check" means there's some kind of roll. The perception system, climbing and things like the environmental abilities that certain classes have(warrior breaking a wall, rogue throwing a rope, etc) could fall into that category as well. But this isn't the "skill check" kind of game, by the semantics I define in my head.
We weren't off topic we were talking about using skill checks to open doors, or unlock runes and stuff like that, so again defiantly not off topic.
Plus it's been said more than likely will have solo content.. and also to encourage grping is never a bad thing and having solo players darting around and camping targets by themselves simply because r they put level it by 20 levels shouldn't be a norm like it was on eq, there nothing emergent about killing something you completely out level it just simply killing a low level target. Plus if a target is a target that can drop decent loot I believe he should have strong CC midigation so simply locking him down and always have a safe distance is bad by design so to basically make him unsoloable.