Rambling ahead...
Originally Posted By: Nioca
-2C) The Black Knight Effect.
This was a problem to some extent, but I felt like Eph actually averted it a number times, narratively rather than mechanically, by attributing action failures to the "wounds" characters had taken.
Originally Posted By: Nioca
3) 2D Warriors.
I too like the abilities Eph awarded Boregloaf. What they reminded me of, and what your comments remind me of, are the Battle Disciplines (or whatever they're called) in A5 and A6.
Originally Posted By: Nioca
4) Combat Gets Priority.
Partly this depended on the campaigns. Eph said at the beginning of the campaigns that Bloodmarsh was to be more combat-focused and Selos less combat more intrigue focused. And think Bloodmarsh has emphasized combat a lot more.
And the vicious circle someone brought up, regarding skill distribution: I felt it. By the final battle of Selos...Lanrezac failed to raise his combat skills to anything like par with the other characters...and the effect of this was that he seemed to be by far the least useful in the final battle, since everyone else's combat abilities/key attribute (INT or STR) so far dwarfed him. Even while I was putting points in Diplomacy and History, I consciously worried that I would fall too far behind in my combat skills. By the end, I actually did learn a variety of interesting details thanks to history, although nothing game-altering. Part of my difficulty using History was thinking in terms of expecting some challenge to come up where I'd roll for history to deal with it, rather than looking for topics on which I could try to gain information. Once I started doing that, it got more useful. One thing I found helpful in raising Lanrezac's stats was to focus on the my concept for the character, and not just on becoming more powerful. He's a bit of an historian, so he needed history. He liked to act diplomatically, so I needed to raise Diplo. to reflect that. Perhaps having more fleshed-out character ideas would help give people the motivation to raise the skills their characters should logically have, and not focus so exclusively combat power? ...of course, there are exception: for example, in the case Kurex, MORE POWER is the character's goal. I know that I definitely hope do better with skill allocation in any future games I play...
Regarding skills: Would I be correct in estimating 10+ in something is mastery of a skill, and 4-6 is a competent or professional level of training? This is based on a couple comments Eph made and the levels of his epic spells. Having a guideline like that would really help me in developing a character's concept (e.g. if I want I competent Dwarf Thief who knows how to deal with all sorts of locks and traps, 5 Thievery and 4 Artifice would be good levels to aim for) from role-playing point of view. I don't want to "waste" skill points by getting 2 in some skill if it'll never good enough for me to use it effectively. So I tend to focus on just a couple skills trying to make sure I can do them well. If I know in advance that getting 4 points in a skill = competence, and gives me reasonable chance of succeeding (as long no one else way over-maxes that skills and breaks the challenge level) I can develop a comfortable level of ability in multiple skills. If I think that I MUST have at least 7 in a skill to have a chance of it working...then I'll only end up raising two skills.
Something that could help character development is just having us all realize that we tended to overinvest in combat, and try to dispel the "arms race" mentality that thinks we have to load on combat skills to get ahead. Unlike a computer game, where the challenges are fixed, Eph has made it clear that this is an adaptable game. When everyone raises combat, he includes more and tougher combat, and leaves out opportunities for thievery, etc. If more people neglected combat for multiple level-ups and raised their other skills, presumably Eph would scale back on the combat and give us other kinds of gameplay challenges.
Originally Posted By: Paraphrasing Dintiradan
Complexity is coming
I hope not. One of the things I liked most about this system is that it isn't complex. I don't want any intricate and complicate class systems and branching talent trees and convoluted calculations to max out characters. I know a complex system can do things a simple one can't...but I'd prefer to stick with the simple one.
Part of my experience is definitely tied to the fact that I, like Rowen, was playing this sort of game for the first time. I know inexperience was definitely an issue for me in terms of how to use my skills.
Regarding Eph's comments about there being other paths: good to know they were there. I'll try to keep on the lookout for them in future. Although...that raises a challenge I struggled with in the game, that I'd love to hear other people's answers to. How does one balance imperative against splitting the party, and of not disrupting the choices of others, with feeling that the party is going the wrong way? One example: when the slave-driver was talking to us after we accidently blew up the prisoner's head (that just sounds wrong...) and we failed in talking to him, he asked for a bribe. I wanted to give a bribe, but had idea what to pay. Others in the party dismissed the idea of buying him off as useless, and decided we needed to just visit Rikkla. From that point on, I just tried to support that decision, even though it seemed like a bad idea (why couldn't we bribe the slave-driver? Or just disappear in the crowds of the city? why did we need to go apologize to Rikkla?). Ye more experienced RP-ers: any advice on how when to just along with the party versus when to take some kind of stand? Other examples: Nixak going off on his nearly killed him, but just moments later, Vitze made some poor choices in dealing with the mob where it seems other characters probably should have stood up and stopped her. Yet outside Sarden, dissension (along with bad dice roles) hurt our diplomatic efforts. I realize there's no one magic answer, but surely experience offers some lessons?
Originally Posted By: Ephesos
Otherwise I would've quit shortly after the jungle burned down.
LOL. Well, it was one of the more spectacular Fails in AIMHack so far.
Hmm...this is long. Yeah, in case you couldn't tell, I like to talk. Sometimes I do it...a lot. Hopefully, if you read this, you found it intelligible, intelligent, and constructive.
