Full party control
myshaq
Member Posts: 18
In my opinion having full party control is requirement for proper D&D feel. But, as I understand, Trent said that's not an option. What do you think? Are you happy with only main character control or you also would like to have proper party control, just like in every IE game?
1
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The overland map was a great concept as well. It gives a good sense of distance and scale.
I ended up having to issue commands to get everyone to stand still, then attack nearest as I tried to lure enemies to my group...
Which reminded me how clunky it is to organize combat by issuing commands. Better AI would definitely help, but the ability to just click on a henchman and move them to where you want them to move would be so much more efficient.
And tactical. With the current state of henchmen I feel there is always as much luck as tactics involved in a challenging fight.
Another thing that would help greatly with party control on the UI side, having to use the radial menu to open a henchman inventory or get them to use a special ability is pretty clunky too.
I know this is more of a UI issue, but it’s one full party control would presumably fix.
If full party control is not in the cards, then at least an improvement in AI for players than want to play with a full party but dislike their fellow party members doing stupid things when at combat (or simply getting stuck on a wall).
in "proper" D&D we can usually find hirelings who are mostly DM controlled (not always) but act in a realistic manner.
I'm playing through the OC and I cannot believe how dumb the Ai is- After being fully rested and running upon a trash mob my caster henchmen will throw every nuke they have at it. For a wielder of magic with an intellect surpassing Einstein they sure act dumb. The 'dm' will usually allow us to talk to the henchmen and plan strategies (which they will usually follow) which is very much akin to giving commands.
The whole "add full party control" debate is probably pointless because I doubt they will add it but its something I would like to see. Adding some strategy and tactics it allow a more realistic game and is better than having henchmen who are supposed to be seasoned adventurers run into a room full bore and aggro everything- Or throw out every nuke they have at a single trash mob when they would know that we are close to a boss fight.
Things like that make me want to scream.
Personally, I'd rather BD spent more of their resources on improving the AI instead of trying to figure out full party control. It would be more likely to succeed, and would result in wider improvements in the game, because AI also would affect enemies in addition to allies.
Which is why NWN2 went with it.
Although I understand the thrust of NWN's aim - to make MP the "party system" with each character being controlled by a Player, one does need to keep in mind that SP outnumber MP by a large margin (and all research points to this as a fact). So the bold move on the part of Bioware failed in that respect.
This should not be seen as a criticism of the MP side of NWN - anyone who has played an online role-playing campaign of NWN will testify that this is the closest that one can come to true P&P style play (and yes, I have).
I personally use OMB's (OldManBeard's) party system in SP - but it has serious shortcomings due to limitations of the NWN engine.
So, in light of Trent's comment that a true full party control will not be implemented, I would suggest that perhaps opening up the NWN Engine to allowing third parties (re: modders like OMB) to truly implement a full party control mod.
I haven’t played NWN in years until I downloaded the headstart... and I had forgotten how frustrating it can be, not only to have terribly dumb AI, but even just to open a henchman’s inventory, or get them to move off a trigger.
NWN1 succeeded despite the lack of party control, not because of it. And I really do think it's as bad as everyone says. For one thing, it makes pure spellcasters almost completely useless as companions. It's not a coincidence that most modules have companions that are either completely non-magical or some kind of hybrid. The only thing caster companions are reliably good for is pre-combat buffs. And why is that? Because the dialogue system can allow you to tell them exactly what to cast and who to cast it on - in other words, direct companion control, albeit incomplete.
The lack of party control also holds module developers back. They know they can't make encounters too complex or challenging, because the lack of control severely restricts the player's tactical options. Even something as simple as having a heavy-armored fighter hold down a choke point to keep enemies from getting to the mage is damn near impossible with NWN1's system. I can't count the number of times I've been playing NWN1 and knew exactly what I wanted to do, but couldn't do it, because it would require direct control. Combat already has enough randomness with the dice rolls. We don't need "Will my party members do something really stupid or not?" as another random element.
I don't expect we'll get full party control in EE.
Interestingly enough it seems like, from Trent’s live stream comments on it, it’s not on the table more because of a design decision in how the game should be played, a la multiplayer as opposed to the type of single player games that the IE engine gave us.
But the number of single player modules- most with at least partially developed henchmen- suggests the single player story driven experience (I think Trent referred to the BG games as more like books) is actually mostly how the game is played.
That is akin to saying people was not interested in color games when the first macintoshs only had screens with black/white capacity.
I meant the game is mostly played as a single player, story driven experience as opposed to a multiplayer DM guided experience.
I’m not valuing one experience over the other, just pointing out how most people play it.
Here's the quote I think you're referring to:
I don't quite get it, because if you ask me, the "sole hero of a D&D adventure" thing is more applicable to NWN than it is to BG. So I'm not sure what he's getting at here.
What's interesting is that he also said this:
So apparently he agrees that party members are necessary and the system works best when it's not just one character, but he believes that giving the player direct control over party members would be crossing some kind of line. I can't say I find that argument particularly compelling.
Suffice it to say, I completely agree with Lilura's response in her article about this issue:
https://lilura1.blogspot.com/2017/12/Full-Party-Control-with-Marquee-Selection-is-Where-Its-At.html
But here we are really speaking of neither single player (with or without henchmen) or multiplayer (one character per player), but about a third player experience that with the current engine is out of reach, single player with full control over a party of 2~8 characters (like in the SSI gold box series of old).
I have to agree with cherryzero - I don't quite know what you're talking about here. We're discussing single-player with henchmen, but controllable henchmen. I don't think that's out of the engine's reach.
I hope that Beamdog will listen to the feedback here and elsewhere, realize how many people want this feature, and add it to the game. No one would lose anything, and a large number of fans would get something they've wanted for years. It would be a huge improvement to the game and open up a lot of possibilities for future modules. If they ultimately decide not to implement it, I'd at least like to see them open up the code enough for the modding community to do it. The latter option seems like something they could do without too much trouble.
With that on mind, lets look at some of the issues. Firstly, the idea that NWN2 has "full party control". It does not. It only lets you control one party member at a time. Whist you can queue instructions for other party members, these are frequently invalidated by movement, causing the rather stupid AI to take over. KotOR also has this issue.
Secondly, viewpoint. As you increase the party size it becomes harder to undestand what is happening without playing in some variation of a "top down" perspective. I generally reckon the critical party size of this is four. Again an issue for NWN2. Whilst NWN does support "top down" play it means the resources spent on developing other viewpoints are wasted.
Thirdy, their are the extensive changes made to NWN rules specifically to compensate for the lack of a party. These include, but are not limited too:
1) hugely boosted familiars
2) Find Traps spell removing traps
3) buffed summoning spells
4) easy healing by resting
5) plentiful healing potions
Which raises the issue: should these changes be reversed if party control is added to the game?
Are they planning to add new viewpoints? I haven't heard that they are. If they're not adding any new viewpoints, no resources are going to waste.
I think individual modules could be balanced around the combination of those elements and full party control. Aren't all of those things moddable anyway? Resting and potion quantity certainly are. Resting isn't just about healing, either. It's also about getting spells back so that spellcasters don't have to spend all their time missing with a crossbow. Personally, I'd like to see a system that gives you another way to recover spells, like a mana potion equivalent, and also restricts resting so you can't fully heal all the time.
That doesn't seem to me like it should be that big of a deal to do, unless there's some hard-coding in the OC standing in the way. I know if I attempt to access a companion's inventory in the OC, it says "The original campaign does not support this function."
Why not? Is there a reason it can't be done, or is it just that the original developers never had time or desire to backport the features?
Since Trent *was* an "original developer", his attitude seems to be the official one, that they only did a single-player campaign because they had to, not because they wanted to. They were all about the multi-player potential of their game engine, apparently.
I hope that Trent can be convinced to change this attitude. I think we single players are a bigger portion of the market for NWN than he seems to think at this time.
I know I'd pay more cash for single player DLC that appealed to me, if it were reasonably priced. I've already given them $40 for the deluxe NWN:EE, and I was happy to do so, to support the project.
It was worth it, as @BelleSorciere says , just to have a useable version of the game that works "out of the box." I was one of many who had constant trouble getting GoG NWN to work properly, on my past three computers.
So it's really just a cost-benefit equation. Now I've played the OC all the way though once, and I really can't see myself playing it though ever again, revamped henchmen or not.
My reasons for this is, the companions in the story are not my player character. I did not create them, they have their own backstory, history, goals and dreams. They are NPCs. They should level up as they see fit and fight as suits their personality in game. With direct party control all NPCs fight on the player’s personality, not the NPC’s personality.
I would enjoy seeing the classic party of 4-6, I would love it if builders are able to customize how cleric 1 vs cleric 2 behaves in combat (A cleric of Ilmater should be more healing focused while a cleric of Tempus is smiting those who stand in his way).
Well, at least you're not against the existence of FPC as an option for those who want it. That's more than I can say for some of the other people I've discussed this issue with, who are vehemently against FPC implementation on principle even if it doesn't affect them at all.
I suppose I just compartmentalize things differently. To me, an NPC's personality comes through in their dialogue, their interactions with the player character, and the overarching plot. Combat is more of a technical thing that's kind of in its own sphere. Besides, if we were to say that their combat behavior reflects their personality, we'd be forced to conclude that every companion in every NWN1 module is an idiot. Especially the spellcasters.