Two honest questions to those who put balance above everything else.
SorcererV1ct0r
Member Posts: 2,176
in Off-Topic
IMO when you make a game, there are trade offs. Deph vs accessibility for eg. Balance is against immersion and variety. If you disagree, look to VtMB. The gamei s extremely harder as a Nosferatu than any other vampire, because Nosferatus are cursed with deformity and the game is extremely social. High seduction can solve some quests and allow you to get masquarede risk free blood on nightclubs. Here is my questons.
1 - If the devs had removed Nosferatu, the game would be extremely more balanced. But do you think that it would make the game better? It is taking out variety for the sake of balance is good?
2 - If the devs had in other hands decided to make the deformity curse be just a -1 dot on seduction. It will kill the immersion of being deformed. Killing the immersion and the atmosphere of for the sake of balance is good?
I saw a lot of people criticizing old school games and modern games made with a old school mindset by being unbalanced. Look to Patfhinder Kingmaker, if the game had only one class and no way to choose attributes, it will be much more balanced. But the game will be obvious worst. A run as a abyssal sorcerer being completely different than a paladin is exactly what makes the game interesting.
On MP games, you need to compromise certain things. For eg, on War Thunder, the first mass produced jet plane, Me 262 had to be placed against cold war era planes. It either this or a nerf on the plane statistics(armament, climb speed, stability, etc). Because Germany had the best technology but was outnumbered. But in a SP game, you can have a player having to deal with outnumbered battles or a much faster enemy and it being fun, enganging and a challenge. Why people care so much about balance in SP games?
And even in MP games, i had far more fun playing NWN on PRC servers and on Ultima Online than in any overbalanced game but i understand some compromises in MP games. I don't expect spells like Armageddon on UO. And understand why a lot of NWN1 servers ban stop time spell.
1 - If the devs had removed Nosferatu, the game would be extremely more balanced. But do you think that it would make the game better? It is taking out variety for the sake of balance is good?
2 - If the devs had in other hands decided to make the deformity curse be just a -1 dot on seduction. It will kill the immersion of being deformed. Killing the immersion and the atmosphere of for the sake of balance is good?
I saw a lot of people criticizing old school games and modern games made with a old school mindset by being unbalanced. Look to Patfhinder Kingmaker, if the game had only one class and no way to choose attributes, it will be much more balanced. But the game will be obvious worst. A run as a abyssal sorcerer being completely different than a paladin is exactly what makes the game interesting.
On MP games, you need to compromise certain things. For eg, on War Thunder, the first mass produced jet plane, Me 262 had to be placed against cold war era planes. It either this or a nerf on the plane statistics(armament, climb speed, stability, etc). Because Germany had the best technology but was outnumbered. But in a SP game, you can have a player having to deal with outnumbered battles or a much faster enemy and it being fun, enganging and a challenge. Why people care so much about balance in SP games?
And even in MP games, i had far more fun playing NWN on PRC servers and on Ultima Online than in any overbalanced game but i understand some compromises in MP games. I don't expect spells like Armageddon on UO. And understand why a lot of NWN1 servers ban stop time spell.
1
Comments
Here's an example of the latter. Fire Storm in Icewind Dale deals a measly 2d8 damage +1 per level, with a save for half (and unlike in Baldur's Gate 2, it doesn't last multiple rounds). Had Fire Storm dealt a more reasonable amount of damage for a great inferno summoned by a powerful druid (say, 1d6 per level up to 20d6 like in some other editions), it would be more usable, yet it wouldn't be less immersive. I think it would be more immersive, because it would be doing the kind of damage I'd expect a fire storm to do.
However, using firestorm after having a thief scout the area and report back to the druid can still be devastating to the enemy. Just saying...
This isn't a issue in single player games because unbalanced tactics just add another layer of difficulty for the player. Devs do need to balance this imbalance some how.
They need to make the unbalanced class or feature either fun and entertaining, or meaningful in a different part of the game. Kingmaker is actually a good example of where a developer got this wrong. Every character I create should be viable to beat the game and if it's not, it should be covered heavily by party play. IMO, they did not do this and people were forced to power game over role play. Having a choice, but it being a meaningless choice in the long run, isn't variety and unbalance, it's just poor game design.
Then the problem is not balance. Is that a storm of fire deals too little damage to felt like a storm of fire.
Gothic 1 fireball deals 150 damage if fully charged. Storm of fire, 500.
2d8 + 1 / lv is too low. I mean, a lv 10 fireball deals 10d6...
Look to NWN2 warlock. They nerfed warlock so badly that you have tentacles who never grapple, his fire wall lasting 3 rounds while fire wall from sorc/wiz lasts CL rounds up to 20... Some people was asking for a kineticist nerf on nwn2. but that would kill the class and make it into another useless class. The power to materialize and control magma needs to feel powerful.
Dark Souls 2 has MP and i don't see a lot of guys running around with chaos rapier hexer(most OP build IMO)
PS : You din't addressed my two questions who makes clear that balances KILL immersion and variety. If VtMB din't had Nosferatu(hardest clan to play by far) or had nerfed his deformity curse, it will make the game better?
The weakness of Icewind Dale's Fire Storm could be phrased as a balance issue (Fire Storm is underpowered and should be buffed) or as an immersion issue (Fire Storm does too little damage to feel like a fire storm). Whether one prefers balance or immersion, increasing Fire Storm's damage would be better. In this specific case, this aspect of the game can be made more balanced and more immersive at the same time, so there's no tradeoff.
On the other hand, there are tradeoffs between balance and immersion in other cases, like your Nosferatu example. In that case, a decision to balance the game could certainly reduce immersion and variety.
3e tried to balance by making cleric/druid spells dealing far more damage and the result? Divine casters are superior to Arcane on both, 3.5e and 5e in any aspect.
They can do everything that a wizard can do, in armor, with weapon proficiency, better saves and healing capabilities.
Personally, I like how Japanese handle it - they just keep both aspects completely separate, so you can have both a balanced combat with nice storyline.
But literally your question is too open since it depends on the game, the type of game and what is the ultimate goal of that game, is it meant to be fun to play with no concern of the story? Tell a intriguing story? More mentally complex?
That is awful. Ludonarrative dissonance is not a good thing. The ideal would be if characters could use more of his spells/skills to solve problems not only combat related
Talking about Japanese games, Dark Souls is good in not having ludonarrative dissoance. If a random ring says that a boss is blind, then the boss is blind and you can use that information in your favor on combat. The game mechanics needs to reflect the game would that you are creating to have a immersive experience.
What makes necromancy good on arcanum is that you powers to revive and call spirits is not combat only. You can call the spirit of deceased NPC and ask then for info to solve quests in a different way.
If balance above variety and immersion was a good thing, 4e would be a success...
If Blood Boil was just a little damage dealing skill on 5 minute cooldown, the game would be far more balanced. But will also be far worst. Will kill the fantasy of being mastered blood magic. Or if they have removed Tremere completely.
I hated how the Nosferatu were done in Bloodlines. They were really barely different with just a few real reactions. In order to get a masquerade violation you had to really run through the streets and chase people around, but nobody in the clubs really reacts to much to you. Moving through the sewers wasn't even really necessary. The Malkavians got a really unique experience with wholly unique dialog almost everywhere.
Bloodlines, like the NWN, Baldur's Gate and Kingmaker games, is based off of table top games that do have a certain amount of balance to them. That's not to say it's all perfectly balanced and a level one wizard isn't likely to manage to kill a level one fighter, but they do try to not let anything get too far ahead of the other classes/clans at that level. The systems are there to create a level of balance in table top, but table top games can get into all sorts of social situations that just aren't really viable to do in a video game. These classes/clans/disciplines are meant to provide a level balance for when characters compete or work together, trying to at least make sure everyone in the group can participate.
VtMB's also has a interesting progression. 1 dot thaumaturgy can make a blood projectile. 5 dot thaumaturgy can transform enemies into blood grenades.
Gothic 1/2/3 also has a amazing progression. Modern games in other hands...
Obviously, for strategy games and other genres, balance is more important. But for RPGs and action RPGs? Who needs it.
Yep. I'm well aware of how overpowered divine spellcasters became in 3rd Ed. XD Especially in tabletop games.
But back to the original topic, I think that there's two schools of thought regarding game balance. The first is the school adopted by more modern RPG and game systems, whereby developers try to create an environment where there are multiple paths to success in the game. Ideally these paths should be equal, yet not identical. For instance, say your game has a Warrior class, a Wizard class, and a Thief class. As they advance in levels, the Warrior should feel more sturdy and powerful thanks to his better armor and greater pool of hit points, allowing him to absorb and endure more damage. The Wizard will feel more sturdy and powerful thanks to greater access to various defensive spells. The Thief, meanwhile, feels more sturdy and powerful because of various skills that allow them to hide from and evade enemies, or movement abilities that let them rapidly reposition around the battlefield. In practice, all three classes maintain roughly the same rate of power advancement, but the way each one plays feels very different to each other.
Then the second school of thought is more like old school D&D, where the different classes can be wildly different in terms of "power", but each one is really designed to fulfill specific niches. A Wizard might be an unstoppable force of destruction once they gain some levels, but they're helpless when it comes to healing wounds. A Cleric can heal and buff, but their combat abilities are severely lacking unless they heavily devote a lot of their spell power reserves to making them efficient combatants. Thieves can be deadly in a fight, but they can't hold up to toe-to=toe slugging with Warrior, and they're usually valued more for the utility they bring to an adventuring party. The end result is that you'll have different characters that vary wildly in terms of "personal power", but they each occupy a specific role that nobody else can fill and so it can feel very satisfying when it's "your time to shine". I think, however, that this approach works better for team-based games that heavily emphasize cooperation rather than turning it into a "competition" between players, which makes it poorly suited for, say, shooters.
There are a lot of OHK spells on RPG's. Gothic 1 had death to the undead. VtMB had blood boil. D&D based games are infested with OHK spells. NWN1 had Wail of The Banshee and Implosion, to not mention phantasmal killer relative early on(4th tier spell)
Finger of Death in a generic wow clone mmo would not be the power to banish the lifeforce from someone's else that can be resisted with high fortitude. Would be just a skill that everyone gets at a specific level and deals a damage 100% scaling with his gear and most important with his weapon and with 2 minute cooldown.
VtMB is not a horror game.
Also keep in mind that enemies should use this disciplines too. The fact that few enemies use disciplines against the player is IMO one of the biggest vtmb's flaws. And vampire hunters in society of leopold using conventional anti personnel firearms makes no sense. If they are really serious about hunting vampires, having a .410 judge with incendiary rounds is the MINIMUM that i expect from then.
Talking about balance and horror, imagine playing Tomb of Horrors on D&D 4e, the most balanced D&D edition. It would be the most boring thing ever. The balance kills all atmosphere and immersion.
Did you not finish the Hollywood area? It was oozing with horror. They definitely did lean much more towards action than horror to make it a video game, though. For a third level power, the blood vomit one was fairly balanced with other powers like dominate that stun groups at that level. Presence is actually much more powerful than it first appears to be and can be better than thaumaturgy in a lot of situations. Brujah and Toreador are like the games easy setting, having celerity and presence.
Ya it's definitely not in the table top version of the game. The first 3 levels work completely different and have nearly no combat value at all. The first one lets you glean information on another vampire by tasting their blood, the second lets you force a kindred to spend blood against their will and the third lets you temporarily decrease your generation. Generation wasn't really implemented in Bloodlines. These are all extremely useful in a table top game, but not so much in an action video game. Theft of Vitae and Blood Boil are both pretty close to how they work in tabletop, though. Blood boil doesn't make people explode though, it will instantly kill any mortal, however since even if they survived the burning, they'd have blood clots. It's still super handy since it does both aggravated damage and strips the opponent of blood at the same time.
You are talking about path of blood on pnp. There are a lot of paths that a Tremere can take on pnp. Lure of flames is one of the most OP combat wise.
Path of Conjuration is extremely powerful. A conjurer is never unarmed. IF the kine understand a little about firearms and chemistry, he can literally create a anti materiel rifle with incendiary rounds from thin air, can make it permanent or wait it disappear to clear evidences. He can for eg, plant deadly traps and bombs in heavily guarded places. And other paths like path of weather allow a Tremere to control the weather.
Path of Mercury allow 500 mile teleportation.
Talking about generation, is a little of topic why i hate it so i will put in spoilers
Note that "your sire determine everything about you" doesn't apply to Kuei Jins.
The 13th generation Tremere mentioned on my example above, can spend literally 2 millenniums feeding upon the strongest occultists and training his domination. He will never be able to dominate a 12th generation fledgling. Unless he diablerizes.
So, my point is. Thaumaturgy is extremely stronger and more versatile on p&p https://whitewolf.fandom.com/wiki/Thaumaturgy_(VTM)
And this not mentioning RITUALS.
I was mainly just trying to outline how the discipline was changed to adapt it to a video game and show how pointless the other powers would have been if they hadn't changed them and to offer some explanation for the presence of blood puke power. They clearly weren't going to put in all the paths and rituals for a video game adaptation, especially with the more limited tech at the time the game came out. In earliest editions of the game, Path of Blood was the only path presented, too, and more didn't show up until you got supplements, so it makes some sense to pick it for the Tremere's discipline.
BTW, Movement of the Mind is one of my favorite overlooked paths, since you can just pick somebody up and drop them from an absurd height, steal or manipulate objects from a distance or just fly around.
I actually like generation, but in the ranges that PCs are generally supposed to be in it's effects aren't as pronounced. Really until you get down to 7th Gen (not possible with normal character creation rules), it's only getting you a bit bigger max blood pool and the ability to spend more than one blood point a turn (asides from dominate). Unless you're playing an Elders game, it's kind of a gate to keep the PCs out of epic power levels reserved for NPCs. They've really reworked this in V5, though. It's kind of a mix of generation from previous Masquerade games combined with Blood Potency from Vampire: The Requiem. They also don't track blood pools in V5 at all, just hunger, so the mechanics are going to be different if it's implemented in Bloodlines 2.
If i an playing warthunder using a Me 262, i wanna feel like i an piloting that plane(WT is immersive on arcane, realistic or simulator mode), at the same way, if i an playing as a necromancer on pf:km, i wanna feel like i an a necromancer in another world. I can enjoy a story by reading a Novel and a tactical game by playing Chess. But i can't feel immersed in another world in other genre than old school RPG.
On Gothic 1 for eg, your protagonist start using a weapon like a anime protagonist, but when he pays to someone to teach him how to use a weapon, his stance and animations change. Animals act like animals(not attack on sight unless they are starving), and if a snapper is running towards you, lure him towards a body of a wolf is a good idea to make him forget you to eat the fresh meat(wolf corpse)
That is not my problem with gen mechanic. I explained that Caine siring 5 people, then never siring again and the same happening to all low generation vampires makes no sense BUT even without gen cap. Reach 6 dots in any supernatural power, as a mage, kuei jin, werewolf, etc would't be easy.
The ST can say that for eg, Tremere elders will NEVER teach their most advanced secrets to novices, even if they had potential to learn, they will spend centuries proving his loyalty towards the clan many times until they could learn 6 dot thaumaturgy. Apply the same to other disciplines and you have a power only for NPC's that makes more sense IMO.
PS : Some rituals aren't possible for high gen vampires. A 13th gen Tremere could NEVER create a gargoyle for eg.
It's 3 that Caine's supposed to have sired. After the Deluge, he supposedly didn't want to do it again, but if he did kept it secret. It's also not so much that Vampires rarely sire that explains why there's relatively so few of them and few generations, it's that the mortality rate for vampires is actually pretty high. Most don't survive their first decade and in fact a lot of them just can't deal with the whole blood thing and greet the sun after their first night as a vampire. A lot of them are sired and discarded to die defending their elders. As @BelleSorciere mentioned there's also the young vs old dynamic going on, with younger kindred trying to diablerize their elders to gain power for themselves. The Dark Ages material has 13th generation vampires behaving more like 14th or 15th gen thin-bloods in modern nights, including the inability to embrace. In older V2/Revised in the '90s to early 2000s, 14th was the maximum cap, but got raised to 15th in the 2000s. So it's implied that for some unknown reason the blood does become stronger with age and the maximum generation limit used to be lower in earlier times.
Generation makes no sense as i've explained. And this elder vs neonate conflicts exists in other vampire settings without generation. You are ignoring that a fledgling sired yesterday can be of 2 second generation and a vampire who lives since the dark ages can be of 13th generation. Newer vampires TENDS to be of higher generation but Carine can decide to mass sire only because he is bored.
VtR Blood potency is far more interesting. Elders are more experienced because they lived far more and has drawbacks for his powers(notably feeding restrictions and more sun damage)
That makes way more sense.
PS : The whole Caine stuff makes no sense IMO. You are a murderer, now get cursed with ludicrous high godlike superpowers.
The Gen thing is meant to symbolize a bit of power inherited from the vampire that made you. I personally dig it, because the World of Darkness isn't fair. Hah, we got back on topic after a long side track. V5 uses a mix of both generation and blood potency, so you'll have that to look forward.
Caine might be in torpor, repentant and refuses to sire ever again, dead or a complete myth. If you believe the book of Nod, all the 2nd Gen were killed by the 3rd, with no mention of diablerie. So those are possible explanations why no more second or third gen vampires popped up. There's also a lot of people who think that generations didn't actually exist until Caine laid down the Curse on the third generation to make each generation weaker than the previous to attempt to prevent what the 3rd gen did to the 2nd from happening again. So before the curse, there technically was no generational difference between 1st, 2nd and 3rd generations, just age.
There are some instances where a third or fourth gen vampire embraced a new fledgling as recently as the dark ages and the lore somewhat implies they were pretty powerful for being so young. Hence why Augustus Giovanni was able to diablerize his sire Cappadocious. This is well outside the level PCs are supposed to be playing with, though. A character like that would definitely be NPC territory.
I didn't forget anything. I know how this stuff works, and I know why it makes sense. I told you why it makes sense. One of the central themes of the game is the conflict between older vampires (who tend to be lower generation) and younger vampires (who tend to be higher generation). Obviously there are exceptions to this trend, like Damien in Chicago by Night, who was sired by the fifth generation methuselah Critias.
In any sensible game, Caine's not going to mass sire because he already saw what happened the first time he sired - they sired, and they sired, and now the vampire's filled with vampires, many of whom are trying to eat each other.
The fact that you dislike a mechanic doesn't mean it "doesn't make sense." It's fine to not like generation. It's not my favorite mechanic either, but to say it doesn't make sense because it doesn't do what you want it to do is not a compelling argument. It shows the curse has a starting point - Caine - and the farther removed from Caine a vampire is the weaker that vampire's potential. This is in fact a driving force in the constant struggle among elders, methuselahs, etc, and between the younger vampires and the elder ones. The possibility of upward mobility through "cannibalism" just heightens the tensions, making the struggle that much more interesting.
Blood Potency is an interesting idea and brings Requiem closer to its inspirational roots, but I would say it has issues that make it less interesting than it could be.
That's not what happened. The Book of Nod is probably the clearest explanation of what did happen, even if it's highly mythologized.