Game News Age of Decadence Released on Steam Early Access

[Irenaeus]

Should mages with quarterstaves really be meleeing with Balors? Think about it, folks.

 

[Bubbles]

Well obviously I didn't mean a definitive "Choose this if you're a merchant", but the descriptions during chargen giving me some idea of what, say, a loremaster is expected to be proficient in isn't the same as telling me how to play.

Yeah, maybe something like "Preserving and understanding pre-war knowledge and technology is a booming business. An increasing number of people see their salvation in the ashes of the past and the market is becoming saturated with icons and objects from the old empire, most without any real value. Loremasters are at the front line of this trade, cataloguing and appraising items, always on the lookout for something of real worth."

 

[Crooked Bee]

Okay I did my part:

I'm guessing this is where the majority of the demo downloads have come from

As soon as Brian Fargo tweeted ‘So, the awesome Fallout-inspired RPG Age of Decadence in now on Steam early access’ I jumped online and bought the game sight unseen.

As soon as Brian Fargo retweeted RPG Codex, you mean

Sorry for unleashing that kind of review upon the world, but hey, at least he bought the game! A job well done, I'd say.

 

[Monty]

I assume when that tweet is forwarded.... non-Codexers assume that the verdict is everything in AOD is shit?

 

[hiver]

Should mages with quarterstaves really be meleeing with Balors? Think about it, folks.

For Darwin award achievement? of course.

 

[Crooked Bee]

I assume when that tweet is forwarded.... non-Codexers assume that the verdict is everything in AOD is shit?

Haha, no, that's jut bitly.com's way of getting a short description from the website; it isn't a part of the actual tweet.

Though that would've appropriate in a way, of course.

 

[Elhoim]

Here's a WIP of the new character screen we are working on. Basically, we converged the bonuses and penalties into attack and defense ratings, and then we check those for deciding THC.

Also, we are planning on adding combat and civil SP, along with the general one. Combat will be awarded for winning fights, while civil for finding non-combat solutions to the problems. General will be awarded for progressing through the story, which can be used in any skill in the case that combat or civil points are not enough to increase it. These points are on top of the current quest rewards, they are not meant to replace them (except for the current combat ones, which were already planned to be combat only ones). Plus we are making quite a bit of re-balancing on quest rewards and checks.

 

[Bubbles]

That skill system sounds better than the current one, yeah. Although it seems daft to place the +/- buttons at the skill cost and not at the skill level.

 

[J_C]

What did I say a few weeks ago? The game will never be released, because you will always find something to change? Guess I was right.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Should mages with quarterstaves really be meleeing with Balors? Think about it, folks.

It was a +1 staff, duh.

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

That skill system sounds better than the current one, yeah. Although it seems daft to place the +/- buttons at the skill cost and not at the skill level.

My thought as well. We aren't raising/lower the cost, but the level.

 

[Elhoim]

That skill system sounds better than the current one, yeah. Although it seems daft to place the +/- buttons at the skill cost and not at the skill level.

My thought as well. We aren't raising/lower the cost, but the level.

Sure, easy change. I thought more in terms of spending rather than increasing skills.

 

[Tigranes]

Something I forgot to add previously; yes, the trickiest thing about the game is that there comes a snap moment when you the player, or your particular character, 'gets it' and the difficulty suddenly changes from 'die 10 times to a fight or run from it' to 'oh, this is as hard as hardest difficulty on some other RPGs, but not much worse'. My combat assassin was at a bottleneck where with 5 dodge, 4 dagger and 4 crit strike he couldn't resolve the mob behind the tavern, outpost, bandit camp, etc. through combat - and I think it's reasonable that a combat character able to get through some of his upcoming challenges by combat, if not all. It eventually took me a dozen reloads to kill the mob behind the tavern experimenting with different weapons, armours, strategies. What that does is give the little bit of SP push necessary to push that character on, and thereafter he's able to beat the assassin Teron ending battle, the Maadoran assassin quest battles, all the arena battles up to the Butcher, etc. etc. not with ease but at least without reloading all the time.

It doesn't bother me so much because I like reloading again and again to get past a fight, though even then I'm still frustrated sometimes. But it does make me wonder - how to best design a 'difficulty curve' for this kind of game. When R1 came out the solution seemed to be put in more quests and options so players can pursue other things before coming back to it. But if you go too far down that path then what happens is your combat dude takes noncombat solutions until he earns enough SP for combat. Maybe there are 8 ways to fight or not fight in Teron and you find you 'have to' not-fight 4 or 5 times so you 'can' fight the remaining 3 or 4 times. Again, I think there's a small but crucial difference between a setting where you can't kill anyone and you're a medium fish in a big pond, which is great, and a game where you want to play a combat oriented character but are often prevented from doing so, which is very bad. I think given the variety of characters you can create in AOD, players who've gone through a few reloads/restarts end up on a nice happy spot in this spectrum, but until then it's easy to end up on all the wrong spots. Besides - if you implement combat/civil SP divide, even that solution's balance may change in weird ways.

This is especially important because to be honest, the meat of AOD I feel is combat. I didn't think so when I first followed the game, but when you play it, it definitely is. Playing a talker is fun, but the game breezes by in a few clicks of dialogue options - you do get some awesome options, some of the best in the genre, but I think such playthroughs only shine in conjunction with other playthroughs where you also get through the combat bloody and worn.

 

[Midair]

In most games when bandits stop you, you know that you will kill them all in the blink of an eye. So, when they say 'your money or your life!' you don't take it seriously. It's all make believe. You wink and say "please take my money but don't kill me" if you feel like larping. When you're ambushed, it's Christmas that came early. Your only concern is whether or not they drop good loot.

We went a different way and we don't expect everyone to like what we did.

You often sound more like a critic than a game designer. It is fair to criticize a game like Fallout for being too easy, but consider why it is easy. It has to be easy because otherwise its flexible character system would allow too many doomed character builds. Because "most games" take a low-difficulty approach, and you are used to criticizing "most games", you seem to forget that the alternative approach also has its flaws. There are subtle differences in the ways different players interpret situations, which makes it difficult to justify why certain builds succeed and others fail. It might benefit the design of your next game if you thought about what you would say if you had to write a scathing review of AoD.

 

[Infinitron]

you want to play a combat oriented character but are often prevented from doing so, which is very bad.

This is a statement that needs to be qualified. Remember, despite its origin stories AoD is essentially a classless game. There is no "Fighter" class that needs to be made a "viable choice" a-la Sawyer. You're playing a person, a person who needs to do what it takes to survive. I'm not sure that the ability to be "combat oriented" is every RPG player's god-given right.

 

[Vault Dweller]

You often sound more like a critic than a game designer. It is fair to criticize a game like Fallout for being too easy, but consider why it is easy. It has to be easy because otherwise its flexible character system would allow too many doomed character builds.

I don't see it as a problem, especially in a fast-paced game like AoD. Basically, either you allow most build to succeed no matter what or you don't. If you're making an epic 80 hour long adventure, you should be more flexible. If you're making a game like AoD, you can afford to take a 'roguelike' approach.

 

[Tigranes]

I am very much behind AOD's design goals where you can't do everything you want, you can't be as badass as you want, sometimes you have to take suboptimal outcomes on the chin, sometimes you spend skill points because you need to not because you want to, etc.

That's a little different from the point that as a player, if you say to yourself, OK, I played through a talkie Merchant, now I want to bash some shit down with my mercenary who in my head is combat-oriented ... then, you still shouldnt' be able to beat everyone down with glee, but you still should be able to fight difficult fights as a means of progressing through the game a lot of the time.

Again, I don't think R4 as a whole is 'broken' in this respect. My own combat assassin fought a lot of battles, while passing up a few by even paying them if necessary, which I like. I also sympathise with those who are not on their 20th character and feel like they built a combat oriented dude but feel they can't actually fight very often because they'll get killed.

Edit: VD above is completely right. AOD would have a very curtailed replayability / playing time if it was as easy as fallout, because it's such a short game. It would devolve into reloading at random points or creating characters with nonsensical skill distribution just to 'see' all the various options. It would trivialise the entire experience, even more so than Fallout, Arcanum, etc. because (1) it's short and (2) there's no 'epic story'. You play someone livinbg by the skin of their teeth, you need the game to reflect that.

 

[Azrael the cat]

Stil trying to work out why removing something's brain is an intelligence procedure.

I mean...the 'intelligence' part of surgery is keeping the patient alive while you remove the organ. Organ transplants are pretty easy if you aren't bothering with the reattachment or patient survival parts.

 

[hiver]

Also, we are planning on adding combat and civil SP, along with the general one. Combat will be awarded for winning fights, while civil for finding non-combat solutions to the problems. General will be awarded for progressing through the story, which can be used in any skill in the case that combat or civil points are not enough to increase it. These points are on top of the current quest rewards, they are not meant to replace them (except for the current combat ones, which were already planned to be combat only ones). Plus we are making quite a bit of re-balancing on quest rewards and checks.

Finally! Finally. How many times have i argued this and wondered "why the hell isnt anyone seeing this???"
Yessss.


How about adding some small self contained missions with some simple and direct C&C in line of what i suggested in AoD subforum? I mean, could that be doable? To beef up and pad the quantity of gameplay, especially concerning the guilds and factions in Teron, but without adding too much or making it too complicated to balance with everything else.

Something I forgot to add previously; yes, the trickiest thing about the game is that there comes a snap moment when you the player, or your particular character, 'gets it' and the difficulty suddenly changes from 'die 10 times to a fight or run from it' to 'oh, this is as hard as hardest difficulty on some other RPGs, but not much worse'.

Yeah, and its mostly the restructuring of the brain neurological pathways that got too accustomed to the usual mass market balance of "effort" - satisfaction.

Again, I think there's a small but crucial difference between a setting where you can't kill anyone and you're a medium fish in a big pond, which is great, and a game where you want to play a combat oriented character but are often prevented from doing so, which is very bad. I think given the variety of characters you can create in AOD, players who've gone through a few reloads/restarts end up on a nice happy spot in this spectrum, but until then it's easy to end up on all the wrong spots.

And ending in all sorts of wrong spots is as it should be. Thats really how life works, after all.
In life, as we know, you get into all kinds of shit and you succeed only if youre determined enough to keep getting up and trying to learn. And sometimes you just cant win and you have to live with it - and learn how to appropriately react to that ego-unfriendly reality to avoid being turned into an asshole or actually fail even more in many different ways. Which is an exceedingly difficult thing to do.

So it should be recognizable on some level to all players as something... realistic. Not that they have to like it.

Besides - if you implement combat/civil SP divide, even that solution's balance may change in weird ways.

May... but i think this approach is inherently more balanced so it shouldnt create any big unbalances - which in the end means less time and money spent on corrections.

This is especially important because to be honest, the meat of AOD I feel is combat. I didn't think so when I first followed the game, but when you play it, it definitely is. Playing a talker is fun, but the game breezes by in a few clicks of dialogue options - you do get some awesome options, some of the best in the genre, but I think such playthroughs only shine in conjunction with other playthroughs where you also get through the combat bloody and worn.

Agreed.

My combat assassin was at a bottleneck where with 5 dodge, 4 dagger and 4 crit strike he couldn't resolve the mob behind the tavern

4 dodge, 4 spear, no cs at all
but it did take about 8 - 10 reloads i think. (didnt really count since i tried doing other things then came back later, after failing those other things too.

 

[Lhynn]

Stil trying to work out why removing something's brain is an intelligence procedure.

Have you tried to remove anything with a staff+1?

 

[Tigranes]

I agree that AOD - and any good game, indeed - should upset those expectations and in doing so rewire them a little bit. That's why I'm not sure what kind of solution I would endorse here. Especially since if it was left as it is, I at least would be happy.

Yeah, I recall I was a lot better at AOD combat by the time I had exhausted R1. This time it came down to relying on 1 crossbow skill & 25% accuracy to try and hit a few, set up the bottleneck between two buildings and go with high counterattack dagger mayhem. I also had to skip fighting people in the Aurelian mine, since that armoured guy with the spear was kicking my ass. Ironically, the more dramatic fights story-wise were a lot easier.

We'll see how far I get with a streetwise thieving praetor.

 

[The Glitterdust Golem]

Stil trying to work out why removing something's brain is an intelligence procedure.

I mean...the 'intelligence' part of surgery is keeping the patient alive while you remove the organ. Organ transplants are pretty easy if you aren't bothering with the reattachment or patient survival parts.

"You knew where the brain was! Good job!"

 

[Lhynn]

Wish you could kill rats outside the city to increase my level and sell all those rats tails to buy myself a bone dagger just so i could easily tackle all those challenges, just throwing time at them and making the game trivial instead of actually having to think....








....wait, no i dont.

But i wouldnt mind randomly generated content kinda like escorts on fallout, was a good way to get around, make some money and experience in a way that didnt feel artificial.

 

[hiver]

I dont think there is actually some overarching global solution.
This new update on skill system is just an expansion of what has been done for R4, not a rewrite.

The rest should be handled on case per case bases. Each mission and quest line have specific places that could be expanded upon with small precise additions. Some of the gameplay scopes in Teron do seem very ...err.. expandable and upgradable - atleast to me.
Surely the Boatman of Styx guild gameplay can be easily expanded and upgraded by providing just two or three additional small self contained mission or tasks to its rooster.
Other such details i mentioned would actually fill the gaps that are now still felt in different ways and bring about much better ultimate gestalt of the game.

We'll see how far I get with a streetwise thieving praetor.

damn...i have to try that too.

 

[Maelflux]

I once played under a DM that killed off my character because there was a trap in her way, and he did under the guise of, "You never asked to check for traps.". Ridiculous.

I am pretty sure he did that because you are retarded. I would have killed you within the first 10 minutes of a PnP game myself, based on your posts.