Warhammer Warhammer 40,000: Rogue Trader Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[smaug]

2nd AD&D is different?

In tabletop, absolutely. In the context of crpgs, it's slightly different in that there's far less emphasis on builds.

I see. Is this one of the reasons why oldfags hate 3rd edition and call it popamole?

 

[Roguey]

I see. Is this one of the reasons why oldfags hate 3rd edition and call it popamole?

Yes. My old pal wrote some posts detailing the differences in mindset https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads...-go-to-new-thread.127856/page-98#post-6172214 https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/toee-is-orgasmic.128943/page-5#post-6250567

 

[Cryomancer]

The tons of (sub)classes and the buildfaggotry in 3.Xe is only because is easier to sell books. You can create kits for 2E with one or two lines and the rules makes clear that is up to the DM to accept such kits or not.

 

[Koolz]

Another Wrath of the Wrongness? Oh Man!

Game starts out with a Transgender in love with a Female Ork who should have died being hung on hook.

I did tell this developer you could think about doing a War Hammer 40K game but you need to be darker more serious and cut the silly dialog.

My play time in Wrath of the Wrongness was always in your next game do this, in your next game do this.

I said that instead of saying "look you suck"

I actually thought there next game was going to have something do with Souls trapped in Weapons to be stronger.

If there is a crowd that likes what they are currently doing then I expect their next game to be just as wrong as the last one.

 

[Saravan]

You do understand that the combat is basically reduced into a mathematical puzzle of who has the better numbers?

This is part and parcel of third edition D&D, no way to fight it. Look at Knights of the Chalice 2. You want something else, play a different system.

You can handwave it all by blaming it on the ruleset but even in a stat-heavy system such as 3:e (and exacerbated in Pathfinder) you can still design encounters and combat where decisions need to be made during... actual combat... to overcome the challenge. Just by developing encounters where positioning and terrain play a larger role in the outcome of a battle can change that. The simple matter of fact is that for Owlcucks in particular, these things are non-existent and the AI is braindead to the point where the difficulty in combat is strictly reduced to bashing your build against the enemy. It can be made much, much better even within that ruleset.

As to the overreliance on buffing in particular, in a table-top session a reasonable DM would never allow a player to stand still outside a dungeon entrance for 15 hours to spam every buff imaginable under the sun. You can easily hardcap this shit in a game as well in numerous ways, but then you would actually have to replace number inflation-based difficulty with something that requires real effort.

 

[The_Mask]

Yeah, we requested the latter to alleviate the former, and also it's pretty immersion breaking.

Let me get this straight, which I understand may be difficult for Owlcucks given the amount of faggotry the game contains, the solution to overreliance with pre-buffing to beat encounters is to also pre-buff the enemies? Jesus christ that is the most retarded shit I have ever heard. All you have achieved is moved the needle to how much more stat padding is needed to beat the encounter. Which summarizes Wrathfinder combat. You solve this by designing encounters better, but you know that actually requires talent. For starters, better AI, then options for them to counter-play your builds and then perhaps some basic shit like making sure positioning and terrain matter? Perhaps not spam 5000 units of mythical-improved-mkII Babus to faceroll against your carefully crafted build that stacks AB from 15 different sources of buffs? You do understand that the combat is basically reduced into a mathematical puzzle of who has the better numbers?

1. by this logic you open yourself to being accused that you dislike it when the NPCs use the same tools that you have at your disposal, which is awkward
2. you also seem to, conveniently, skip over the part where Abjurers have something to do now (compared to Kingmaker), which is - again - awkward
3. each mythical path has a way to deal with the "mythical problem", for example Aeons simply mute those levels/abilities/on-going buffs and so on...

The only solid point you're making is that they should've added an Z axis, which would be correct, but one would also counter that by saying: "they focused resources on mounted combat, which is not common in RPGs", but point for you.

All-and-all... it makes sense to attack WOTR on a narrative level, but mechanically you're coming across as awkward, because they tried pretty hard.

Also... not that it matters, but if you're going to debate in detail... it's "Babau".

 

[Delterius]

the solution to overreliance with pre-buffing to beat encounters is to also pre-buff the enemies?

thats hardly an owlcat innovation. see: mages in baldurs gate 2, etc.

 

[mediocrepoet]

Anyone else hoping for a SJW 40k announcement tomorrow? The butthurt must flow!

 

[Cryomancer]

As to the overreliance on buffing in particular, in a table-top session a reasonable DM would never allow a player to stand still outside a dungeon entrance for 15 hours to spam every buff imaginable under the sun.

I would just cast dispel magic against party on the first opportunity.

Otherwise you have situations like >>

SJW 40k announcement tomorrow? The butthurt must flow!

Curious. Will be 40k for Games WOKEshop? A spelljammer retroclone? Who knows. Is probably 40k.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

And OPM slaps him and he crumbles to dust.

 

[Desiderius]

I would just cast dispel magic against party on the first opportunity.

He just wants to whine and cry. Whatever.

Wrath does have several instances of adds hidden around corners or stealthed casting Dispels. If applying the buffs annoys you (who isn't annoyed by that?) there's now very smooth mods to handle it.

All Owlcat did was stretch out the AB/AC scale from 10-40 to 10-100 to increase granularity (to make more room for different combos of items, abilities, and spells) and the PnPers still haven't recovered. Likewise to a lesser extent on DC/Saves.

The problem with Wrath was that all that was in place at the beginning of Alpha and they just haven't done enough to fill in that design space. It's still there (and even more so for the Crusade stuff) for an enterprising modder to really go off with it, but OC is cranking out games so fast (They're like the anti-Bethesda) that it's unlikely to ever happen.

 

[Jaedar]

Can't wait for people to be very upset that rogue traders can hire kroot and ork mercenaries, and will cooperate with xenos at the drop of a hat if it seems profitable.

 

[Saravan]

Yeah, we requested the latter to alleviate the former, and also it's pretty immersion breaking.

Let me get this straight, which I understand may be difficult for Owlcucks given the amount of faggotry the game contains, the solution to overreliance with pre-buffing to beat encounters is to also pre-buff the enemies? Jesus christ that is the most retarded shit I have ever heard. All you have achieved is moved the needle to how much more stat padding is needed to beat the encounter. Which summarizes Wrathfinder combat. You solve this by designing encounters better, but you know that actually requires talent. For starters, better AI, then options for them to counter-play your builds and then perhaps some basic shit like making sure positioning and terrain matter? Perhaps not spam 5000 units of mythical-improved-mkII Babus to faceroll against your carefully crafted build that stacks AB from 15 different sources of buffs? You do understand that the combat is basically reduced into a mathematical puzzle of who has the better numbers?

1. by this logic you open yourself to being accused that you dislike it when the NPCs use the same tools that you have at your disposal, which is awkward
2. you also seem to, conveniently, skip over the part where Abjurers have something to do now (compared to Kingmaker), which is - again - awkward
3. each mythical path has a way to deal with the "mythical problem", for example Aeons simply mute those levels/abilities/on-going buffs and so on...

The only solid point you're making is that they should've added an Z axis, which would be correct, but one would also counter that by saying: "they focused resources on mounted combat, which is not common in RPGs", but point for you.

All-and-all... it makes sense to attack WOTR on a narrative level, but mechanically you're coming across as awkward, because they tried pretty hard.

Also... not that it matters, but if you're going to debate in detail... it's "Babau".

1. That's a wild and disingenuous misinterpretation. The issue is that their method of solving stat inflation is not by more stat inflation.

2. Ok? What does this have to do with stat inflation combat.

3. You seem to still be missing the point. The entire combat system is set up in such way that the outcome is decided merely by decisions made outside of combat, i.e. lack of tactical depth.

Anyone else hoping for a SJW 40k announcement tomorrow? The butthurt must flow!

Ah yes, the standard fanboy defence. Ohh must be butthurt oh so butthurt. You have no actual arguments. The irony is that the very first thought you had coming in to this thread was hoping that they would remove bonus stacking for their next game, lmao.

I would just cast dispel magic against party on the first opportunity.

He just wants to whine and cry. Whatever.

Wrath does have several instances of adds hidden around corners or stealthed casting Dispels. If applying the buffs annoys you (who isn't annoyed by that?) there's now very smooth mods to handle it.

All Owlcat did was stretch out the AB/AC scale from 10-40 to 10-100 to increase granularity (to make more room for different combos of items, abilities, and spells) and the PnPers still haven't recovered. Likewise to a lesser extent on DC/Saves.

The problem with Wrath was that all that was in place at the beginning of Alpha and they just haven't done enough to fill in that design space. It's still there (and even more so for the Crusade stuff) for an enterprising modder to really go off with it, but OC is cranking out games so fast (They're like the anti-Bethesda) that it's unlikely to ever happen.

It's always with the whine and crying and butthurt retorts. It's okay I understand you don't have any actual arguments here. "Increasing granularity" isn't exactly the appropriate term for going from inflation to hyperinflation. Typical fanboy behavior is to paint a false picture of the complexity of WotR in some sad attempt to feel like you are being "smart". The standard solution module is the same, all you are doing is finding ways to buff and stack bonuses. You are taking practically zero decisions on the fly, you are not required to adapt or react to the encounters the way good combat is designed.

There is no situation where you won't be using the exact same order of buffs, the same methods to solve the challenge. This is highlighted by the fact that you keep jerking off to buffbot, you literally install a mod that records your order of buffs for every encounter so that you can then press a button to spam them all at once for every non-trash encounter, these being simply defined as enemies with higher stats, because that is how this entire encounter design has been constructed. Sure, you might throw in the occasional "extra" buff towards specific enemies, e.g. Death Ward, but that hardly changes the fundamental gameplay during combat.

 

[Saravan]

the solution to overreliance with pre-buffing to beat encounters is to also pre-buff the enemies?

thats hardly an owlcat innovation. see: mages in baldurs gate 2, etc.

Yes and? What exactly is your point? Other games made a design flaw so it's acceptable in this game?

 

[Aarwolf]

In WotR you get a single human companion in a city where the majority are humans.

Le what?

You literaly start the game with three humans (Seelah, Cammelia and Anevia), two of which are permanent companions. Then you get Sosiel and his brother, Trever later in the game. That's four overall, and two in Kenabres straight from the beginning. If you are a lich, then you can have nearly all human party, albeit undead - Delamere, Ciar, Kestoglyr, even Galfrey herself.

Oh by the way, mongrels are humans too - corrupted by the Abyss, but ok, you're entitled not to see it that way.

You try to make it like everywhere we should have some quotas, but if so, we shouldn't have any non-human companion, because that's what Worldwound demographics are on crusader's side. It would be stupid and boring, but hey, some autists here would be very happy to play their own fantasy in crpg.

I play RPG's (tabletop and crpg) for 25 years (my first AD&D session was in July 1997) and it was always that way - we all knew that humans make 90% of population, but we played dwarves, elves, halflings and even gnomes for fun and for the good laugh, to please ourselves. I DM'd a session, where all players were oddballs, ie. centaurs, satyrs etc, because we were interested in how would this play out against nearly all-human community, and that was one of the best sessions I ever had.

I know that there are many snowflakes in the american fandom who has to be as strange as possible, but what you are doing is the same extreme, but taken from the opposite site. If non-humans in your party make your game nonimmersive for you, you can shrug and make your own mercenaries as you see fit, play with human companions and mercenaries and that's perfectly ok but don't blame others who like to have different companions from different cultures and races around.

 

[Sarathiour]

Cammelia

She's technically an elf beside being helpful.

 

[Saravan]

In WotR you get a single human companion in a city where the majority are humans.

Le what?

You literaly start the game with three humans (Seelah, Cammelia and Anevia), two of which are permanent companions. Then you get Sosiel and his brother, Trever later in the game. That's four overall, and two in Kenabres straight from the beginning. If you are a lich, then you can have nearly all human party, albeit undead - Delamere, Ciar, Kestoglyr, even Galfrey herself.

Oh by the way, mongrels are humans too - corrupted by the Abyss, but ok, you're entitled not to see it that way.

You try to make it like everywhere we should have some quotas, but if so, we shouldn't have any non-human companion, because that's what Worldwound demographics are on crusader's side. It would be stupid and boring, but hey, some autists here would be very happy to play their own fantasy in crpg.

I play RPG's (tabletop and crpg) for 25 years (my first AD&D session was in July 1997) and it was always that way - we all knew that humans make 90% of population, but we played dwarves, elves, halflings and even gnomes for fun and for the good laugh, to please ourselves. I DM'd a session, where all players were oddballs, ie. centaurs, satyrs etc, because we were interested in how would this play out against nearly all-human community, and that was one of the best sessions I ever had.

I know that there are many snowflakes in the american fandom who has to be as strange as possible, but what you are doing is the same extreme, but taken from the opposite site. If non-humans in your party make your game nonimmersive for you, you can shrug and make your own mercenaries as you see fit, play with human companions and mercenaries and that's perfectly ok but don't blame others who like to have different companions from different cultures and races around.

Camellia is half-elf, Anevia is a temporary companion that becomes an NPC after tutorial and Trever is a "secret" companion that requires very specific dialogue choices (and is available from Act 4). Lmao at bringing up UNDEAD companions, yeah they were previously humans.

If mongrels are humans let's just call everyone a human. What is this trash logic.

 

[Shadenuat]

part of me hoped they would pick up some dead strategy series and try to resurrect it for a change; in particular Disciples was ruined by russians and I think it's only fair we must unruin it back. Althought it's just me I not so long ago played through RoTE and then original campaigns and thought: boy developers love to leave great words and games forgotten and never pick em up or if they pick them up it's like they never played or loved a thing about what they r doing

 

[Aarwolf]

She's technically an elf beside being helpful.

She's half elf, I really did forget it. I remembered her father being human, so I assumed she was also one. My bad.

Camellia is half-elf, Anevia is a temporary companion that becomes an NPC after tutorial and Trever is a "secret" companion that requires very specific dialogue choices (and is available from Act 4). Lmao at bringing up UNDEAD companions, yeah they were previously humans.

But still it's very far from "I only have one human companion in my game, waaaaaa" you did at the start.

If mongrels are humans let's just call everyone a human. What is this trash logic.

News at eleven - in DnD we have different races like dwarves, elves, halflings and so on, and we have human-based planetouched (aasimars, tieflings etc) that have human families, human parents and some distant non-human ancestor. They are not other races per se, they are and they were still considered humans in most of their respective societies. Mongrels are similiar in that way - they are descendants of human crusaders and racewise are still human, not of elven or dwarven origin.

 

[Saravan]

But still it's very far from "I only have one human companion in my game, waaaaaa" you did at the start.

As it is apparent that you are unable to read, you will notice I was talking about the first city (Kenabres) from what you quoted. Nothing has really changed from what you said, there is one human companion in a city with 95% humans that you get. That's it. Two in total (three if we count the black gay man's brother that you get mid-late game after choosing exactly the correct order of dialogue options). The fact that you have to bring up a temporary tutorial NPC to try make your point just highlights the issue.

News at eleven - in DnD we have different races like dwarves, elves, halflings and so on, and we have human-based planetouched (aasimars, tieflings etc) that have human families, human parents and some distant non-human ancestor. They are not other races per se, they are and they were still considered humans in most of their respective societies. Mongrels are similiar in that way - they are descendants of human crusaders and racewise are still human, not of elven or dwarven origin.

Mongrels are defined as monstrous humanoids in Pathfinder, right there together with races like Serpentfolk and Derhii. Really you are going to try argue that these are humans?

 

[Aarwolf]

As it is apparent that you are unable to read, you will notice I was talking about the first city (Kenabres) from what you quoted.

And then there was my whole response to your Kenabres quota nonsense that you obviously didn't bother to read.

Mongrels are defined as monstrous humanoids in Pathfinder, right there together with races like Serpentfolk and Derhii. Really you are going to try argue that these are humans?

Ah, you're one of the people who read very selectively. I wrote about aasimars and tieflings too (two more companions in Kenabres, but who cares), and yes, I consider mongrels more human than monster or animal. And to anticipate your predictable rambling in your next post - you seem to be one of the people who thinks "oy vey, one of my great great great grandmothers was jewish, so I am a jew myself" and yes, this is the answer why I treat aasimars or tieflings as humans and not as different races like elves or dwarves.

 

[Saravan]

Ah, you're one of the people who read very selectively. I wrote about aasimars and tieflings too (two more companions in Kenabres, but who cares), and yes, I consider mongrels more human than monster or animal. And to anticipate your predictable rambling in your next post - you seem to be one of the people who thinks "oy vey, one of my great great great grandmothers was jewish, so I am a jew myself" and yes, this is the answer why I treat aasimars or tieflings as humans and not as different races like elves or dwarves.

What's fascinating is how you are really grasping at every sliver of straw to try make an incorrect point about the number of actual human companions in the game, yet, at the same time want to convey a point about this not actually mattering anyways.

 

[Aarwolf]

And you are one of the people who can't stand the fact that someone dares to see things in a game differently than yourself and enjoy the game more than you. So whatever.

 

[Saravan]

And you are one of the people who can't stand the fact that someone dares to see things in a game differently than yourself and enjoy the game more than you. So whatever.

You will only hear this sort of response about Owlcuck games. When it comes to highlighting flaws in other games, say BG3 it's suddenly a "discussion". WotR fanboys are so unbelievably hypocritical in their positions.

Things that would absolutely be decimated to pieces in other games are explained away in 15 different ways about this game. You would rather seriously try to argue that Tieflings and Aasimars are considered humans than just admit they shoved in a bunch of exotic companion races with no logic to the gameworld.

By the way we are posting in a RPG forum, talking about what makes games shit or good is the entire point.

 

[ItsChon]

Pathfinder was a dogshit game. The combat seemed similar to the amazing IWD/BG, but the transition to 3.5 E was terrible. Combat is completely braindead, and I couldn't get past more than a few hours of the terrible companions and bland setting. How anyone can enjoy Poncefinder: Cuckmaker, D:OS2, or even BG2, with their amusement park philosophy of game design I'll never understand.