It was a good game. 👍

Oh I bought Pillars after watching this lol

It’s included in my subscription now to ps+ and I’m so excited

shame that poe was dogshit

marketing would be so easy if you got an hour long talk to sell it. then again...

Best niche thing that ever happened to the GDC :).

It’s not mindbogglingly specific. It’s core game design at a game dev conference.

Niche? Christ. What?

It's funny that half the replies taking offence at you calling it "niche" didn't watch the video - Josh described this talk as niche, several times. Those are his words! Open your ears guys lol, he's just quoting Josh

@@apollo849 Ah. But then I take offense at Josh instead of OP.

I just watched this for the first time but I know I'll come back too! Love it when I finally find the kind of talk I'm looking for

exactly

*option

Why is might an option then?

@@Wastedswan not every character needs might. CC focused characters buff/debuff etc

Engineering stand up comedy … nah

I like how Pallegina was a middle of the road Paladin with decently high interrupt ability and the mod went "No, I want a tree. Sturdy, life refilling and giving me lots of shade"

Thought? They are useless on anything above normal. Why create not just suboptomal companions but badly created ones?

@@robertnomok9750 From personal experience, you are wrong. That is all.

@@robertnomok9750 Just beat the game on hard with first Eder, then Pallegina as tank. Aloth or Hiravias as caster. And Sagani as ranger. Custom Chanter, Rogue, and MC 2H fighter. Did some stuff with Maneha and DoC as well. There was nothing wrong with the companions. Even though I upscaled every single time I could, the game was very rarely difficult. The last fight was over disappointingly quickly. I didn't need to grab all the best gear. I waited probably longer than I should have to enchant my gear to superior/legendary and with durgan steel. I am pretty certain I didn't optimize a lot of the gear I used. Basically, the game was just on the brink of being too easy on upscaled hard, with half the party as default companions. You could not be more wrong with your statement that they are useless above normal.

@@Taeerom path of the damned the only diffucly i play on so could be wrong about hard.

It's also a good way to really cement the question in your mind, and gives you a little time to formulate an answer while you're asking yourself the same question. Additionally, it helps convey to the person asking that A) you were paying attention to their question and B) you understood what it was they were asking. B is a little less obvious since, for the most part, a question is pretty straightforward, but it can be useful to reframe the question in your own words to see if a slightly different angle reveals any miscommunication.

Gorion would be proud of your actions.

@@DrowFighterMage Is that so, oh, omnipresent authority figure?

I think people are so vocal not because the system deserves criticism, but because the video title is a bit bombastic.

I personally loved having my mage more capable of moving heavy things than my paladin. That's GREAT game design, great philosophy. Obviously the most correct. This game is awesome, but the stat design is terrible. It's a role playing game where you have to pretend the guy carrying a big fucking sword isn't as strong as the guy who reads constantly, just to keep basic immersion. And he did create dump stats. But he picked the wrong damn ones.

@@IAmAnEvilTaco "personally loved having my mage more capable of moving heavy things than my paladin" you talking about PoE?, cause there is no loot weight limit in the game. "It's a role-playing game where you have to pretend the guy carrying a big fucking sword isn't as strong as the guy who reads constantly." who said that the guy who reads constantly isn't capable of holding a sword himself? the fact that the guy isn't strong says it, he ISN'T strong, what you are pointing out isn't a problem with the design philosophy, but specific inconsistencies, like weight limit and required strength for carrying weapons. "And he did create dump stats" the fact that some states are less effective for specific builds, like intelligence for two-handed builds, doesn't mean that they are dump stats. low intelligence is going to hurt your will defense and buffs duration, so your build is going to be much more susceptible to will attacks and going to benefit much less from buffs. there are going to be downsides, but less harmful for a specific build. the whole design is about making attributes express themselves much better and realistically by making min-max an optimal way to play but not required one so your two-handed warrior isn't the hulk in context of the strength - intelligence difference, and also letting you benefit in any way from every attributes for most every builds.

@@eliran9231 i think he is talking about the cyoa sequences where the might stat affects your character physical strenght, which goes against what this stats system tries to do in the first place

Well, this doesn't really 'remove' the possibility of trap options, it just makes the traps more complicated. As he was saying, if you build a character with int then you need to make a build around using AOE and durations, because that's what your attributes support. The issue of having abilities that don't line up to your attributes still exists, it's just now that issue emerges every time you level up and pick an ability instead of only when picking your class and attributes. Is that really 'better?' maybe, but my opinion is that this is a class/attribute system designed by someone who would rather not have classes and attributes, as he more or less tells us. It loses the strength of class based systems, which is simplicity and intuitive archetypal designs and in return gives you the ability to make counterintuitive builds effective, like a barbarian with high intelligence who uses genius level intelligence to hit things that are further away with his axe while in a berserker rage. I guess that's amusing but it's hard for me to call it good design. The design philosophy they were following is just... not good for a class/attribute based system but rather than use a different system they stuck to it for the sake of tradition, which I disagree with. If your system and philosophy disagree, either use a different system or use a different philosophy. Going in blind to POE I ran into just as many 'trap' builds as I did in Baldur's Gate, which really just tells me that the solution isn't doing what it's intended to.

an answer to that rhetorical question, from personal experience, is "people playing the hardest difficulty setting and picking off 1 mob at a time from cover for most of most missions". ME2 had a lot fewer enemies that would flush you out of cover than the further ones, and a lot of players never stopped playing 3 and A like they learned in 2. I'd say a good example of poor choice design is the shepard upgrade that shoehorns a giant multiplier to paragade points you DIRELY need for some of the hardest checks at the end of the game...into only one side. I don't even remember the effect of the competing shepard passive, I've never completed a ME2 run where i cared that little about securing everybody's loyalty; most people I know haven't. the vanguard dev gets props on this front from me. Charge gains bullet time and a sizable chunk of extra shielding for being single target, the choice is pretty competitive.

Out of all the modern day CRPGs PoE has by far the worst and least meaningful stats. Not a masterclass. Just some chode, that doesnt even like the genre, trying to defend why its not bad just because everyone hates it and all in the name of inclusivity. This dude should be bagging groceries and not giving talks about game design and balance.

@Mod Whatever you say smooth brain.

@@MrMasters1983 lol dude, Joshua is the best :) how dare you

Do I need to remind that they had to REMAKE that system after release because 1.0 was garbage with several stats being next to useless while stats granting accuracy were the best?

@@SeekSeekLest punch children in the face to assert your authority #sigma mindset

This is a tough problem in CRPG's. You can have a nice linear scale in combat, so that 15 INT and 16 INT are both equally viable. But the skill checks in conversation are usually just binary. If you have 16 INT, you get everything, but if you have 15 INT you get nothing. The only way to really get around this is to roll randomly for conversation checks.

@@JackMack That is not the only and frankly the worst way for cprg, as it ignores save/load Better options: * Don't require max stats to pass adventures, doh, make it a choice to use a stat based option not a reward for maxing the stat. Don't hide best options behind stat gate * Provide options that are based on combination of stats (for example check for sum of int and willpower) you can to it up and require multiple high stats for passing the gate, that way overspecialization will result in less options, not more. Basically reward stat distribution you want characters to have

@@DmitryKozlovtsev I disagree with you. Disco Elysium used random skill checks to great effect. It can work well when done right. The key is not to cut off progression behind those checks, and treat failing skill checks as an important part of the game. Neither of your solutions fix the issue I'm talking about: The check itself is still binary. If the skill check is at 15 INT, then having 10, 11, 12, 13 or 14 INT is all exactly the same as having 0. Either you have the stat at the required level, or you don't. Summing up INT and WILL is the same, you have the required points or you don't. In the rest of the game, each stat boost gives you a meaningful improvement. 11, 12, 13 or 14 STR all make a meaningful difference in combat. It's not just a system where you need 15 STR or you're out of luck. Using random skill checks isn't a perfect solution, but when it's done right, I think it can be better than a straight stat check. It means that boosting your stat to 11, 12, 13, etc, all give a meaningful improvement to your chance of success. It's not just a "You must be this high to ride" system.

@@JackMack in disco elysium it worked to great effect of me starring at loading screen after reload. Binary outcome is not a bad thing in itself its when bibary outcome means you don't progress unless you don't meet stat requirement we have a problem. That is the first approach, just don't make players feel that they NEED max stats, make other options viable. Using combination of stats again allows you to have more character variation pass the gate alleviating perceived pressure of maxing stats to meet some checks.

@@JackMack Roll plus skill modifier is the best solution for that problem, well unless you are playing a videogame and could just save scum your way into a success check.

Right. I thought of might sort of being forceful. A mage can be mighty, just in a different way. It's just sort of awkward that it also affects their muscles too, but no moreso than quantifying intelligence and wisdom.

I had a witch type rogue character in another game and I had her might high because of intimidation and checks for people being fearful of your power depended on might, since she was supposed to be a feared legendary centuries old witch I wanted those options for her. Plus might also increased melee damage.So I went int and might. :)

@@quayseanthomas-el6910 that's exactly what I meant! Usually that would just be folded up into charisma but that didnt exist so you made the combination that fit what you needed. Thank you.

I felt it was just power. A wizard with powerful spells can intimidate people with the threat of magical violence, and can also apply their poweful spells in order to e.g. break down a door without a a hammer

But D&D is supposed to be that way, there are things that are going to be better than others there is just no escape to that, homogenization doesn't lead to fun things because quoting Syndrome from the incredibles movie "When everyone is super, no one will be". Also you can still min max in PoE is just that the game is more easy and with a widest range for error.

@@zzxp1 Where do you get the idea that D&D is unbalanced? If anything it's too _balanced_ , from my perspective.

I loved AD&D being unbalanced. It makes characters completely different and you need a group to make things work. I always preferred and DMed high fantasy settings because AD&D was designed for that if you ever played past name level characters. Artifacts, plane travelling, alternate prime material planes. Characters who even up to 30th level can be brought to their knees with planar travel and high level monsters that are also as smart as the players.

Have you watched Avatar the last airbender?

@@mohandasjung yeah, why

@@IcoKirov I imagine Toph as a might wizard capable of push rocks and bend metal!

Agreed, odd that after the first half where he explains in detail why it's important to allow people to express their characters in the full numerical range, he pivots to justifying why all the NPC stats ended up looking like a middling 3E point buy

They designed the companions to be middle-of-the-road and jack-of-all-trades intentionally so that people could fit them into their party if they desired.

We're talking about the stated motivation of characterizing the players and NPCs through stats, and how that motivation fell through in the results. The original commenter likely agrees with your point -- did you not read the last paragraph? I don't mean that negatively, it can be hard to notice the 'Read more' text when it breaks off at a whole paragraph

Sure I did. I think they expected bigger attribute gaps than the developer intended to imply, but perhaps there was an internal process by which the character writing and attribute selection were misaligned.

@@souptouchesme It's a game, not a puzzle.

Its still kinda imba though as in optimal build dialoguewise is still dumping a certain stat aka constitution and maxing rest or most needed stats is still best. Admittantly only is safe option on lower difficulty games of poe1 and or poe2

Monk/Psion boi!

@@gaming4life551 His backstory is orphan, raised by evil monks. So, I've been having fun throwing different monk combos at the party. Gonna have make up a monk\psion. Thanks for the suggestion.

@@michaelblosenhauer9887 ha love it. I think the 3.5 ed psionics handbook had a Prestige Class named "Mind Monk" which required both classes to qualify.

@@gaming4life551 Oh, that's bbeg material, right there.

I think the ambiguity is beneficial. I mean, what comes to mind when I say "Mighty Wizard"? Not a ripped guy. But I can imagine Might meaning physical strength aswell even if I'm playing a wizard because that's the type of character I have in my mind.

Check out "The Age of Decadence", failing a quest and f*cking up spectacularly can still move you forward.

@@pablobronstein1247 Which is good, because pretty much anything you try to do will require several different checks in a row and a single failure can gate that option off. That said pretty much everyone plays that game using the exact same build anyway.

@@Dieonceperday I half-agree with you. I don't mind the game locking me out of options, I mind them not hiding it well enough. People are accustomed to Bethesda style playthroughs where you can do and be everything. Problem is rpgs aren't real life and infinite branching is sadly not possible, but AoD was on the right track imo.

Woah! Didn't expect to see you there. Have you played/beat PoE? Going through it now, having a blast

@@edallsteadt8484 hey, man! Long time no see! I didn't get very far, only to the hanging tree situation but I liked what I played and I love their attribute system. And the music, my god lol hope you're doing well!

Yeah, I don't understand that second audience question... nothing needs to be workshopped "tabletop"... it's irrelevant. I doubt even modern pen and paper RPGs are "workshopped" tabletop. Heck, many roleplayers use computers to manage stats and such. What would testing with pen and paper tell you that couldn't easily be discerned with the software itself?

Why?

because some people like a challenge, self imposed or otherwise. just because you can put a game on easy and one shot everything doesn't mean thats the most fun way to play the game.

Do I need to remind you that on hardest difficulty they just raised stats and added x2 amount of enemies to every fight? And those wonderfuly crafted not min maxed companions are just deadweight that can hit anything?