Sander and requiem discuss SPECIAL part 2

Sander said:
And its environment is what it was built for.
As I've noted time and time again: any system can have an environment crafted for it in which it is balanced, but if the environment it was created for does

not work with the system in a balanced way I don't consider it to be balanced. As I've also noted time and again, you can either balance the system or the

environment. Both are equally valid. You have not given a single valid reason as to why this would not be the case.
How does SPECIAL not work in Fallout? Every task that needed a skill check is covered, it allows you to create a character as you please. Just because some character builds would have less to do in the game doesn't make it unbalanced. Especially since there's no set path through the game.

Balancing the system to fit the environment does have drawbacks, it limits you to what can be done in the game or more importantly future games. This goes to the heart of game play vs setting, which means more to Fallout. If you keep balancing the system to fit the environment then eventually you get a game that's unrecognizable as a Fallout game. It's a fine line to tread, if a skill isn't used much in the first game and you balance the system by merging it or removing it for the next game why bother trying to think up things to do for the other skills. Why not just concentrate on combat and to a lesser extent speech with a few mini games for the rest?

Sander said:
Possibly, but I doubt it. I don't see how removing gambling, or merging first-aid and doctor precludes you role-playing, really.
I'm not entirely against some changes such as getting rid of energy weapons (adding science to the to hit calculation for weapons flagged energy) or merging unarmed and melee
(neither skill is meant to be a formal martial art and you are as likely to use you fists, feet, elbows and even headbutts as much as your weapon) changing non combat skills is another kettle of fish. Not every first aider is a doctor, having a single medical skill allows the character to perform complex surgeries wether it's in character or not. On the other hand having separate skills does allow for more role playing rather than roll playing. What would balance the skills though is allowing medium to high doctor to be able to also use first aid.

Sander said:
There are also, of course, professional poker players but they work based on the weaknesses of their opponents, who are not the casino and can hence be beat.

And again: this form of gambling isn't offered in Fallout.
No it wasn't offered in Fallout but that doesn't mean that every Future Fallout game or mod has to offer the same games. It's your character playing after all, with just a front end offering you a choice to bet or not and if so how much, something that could be changed to reflect a poker or other game. But if you take out the skill then you limit the choice of games to those that rely on pure luck, you limit the role playing to playing just a lucky character or not.

Sander said:
You don't. You don't need to, either, unless there's a serious need for it in the game. With the limited use of traps in the games, that isn't really the

case, for instance.
Yes, I know, balancing the environment vs. balancing the system. See my note above.
Why should there be a serious need for anything in the game? Unless the game is hideously overly scripted. That was the beauty of Fallout and SPECIAL for me, there wasn't a proscribed method to play.

Sander said:
No, that's bullshit. I never said that, nor ever claimed that. I said that every skill should be equally useful, that means that there should be equal

opportunity for every skill (combat skills perhaps excluded, because those can be used near infinitely) to be used, not that every skill should be usable at

every opportunity.
Yes you did, though you've just modified it with the exclusion of combat skills from your rebalancing. How is 'equally useful' not efficient? How is 'equal opportunity for every skill' not an efficient use?
 
requiem_for_a_starfury said:
How does SPECIAL not work in Fallout? Every task that needed a skill check is covered, it allows you to create a character as you please. Just because some character builds would have less to do in the game doesn't make it unbalanced.
Ehm, yes it does.
Yet again: I know that you can do everything Fallout allows you to do with SPECIAL. That's not the point.
And I'm not talking about character builds either, because you can always make a weak character if you want to. Again: not the point.
The point is that the system is *internally* unbalanced. The skills that cost the same amount to improve, are not equally powerful. Fact. Hence, there is an imbalance. Fact.
I don't see how you can possibly refute this.
requiem said:
Especially since there's no set path through the game.

Balancing the system to fit the environment does have drawbacks, it limits you to what can be done in the game or more importantly future games. This goes to the heart of game play vs setting, which means more to Fallout. If you keep balancing the system to fit the environment then eventually you get a game that's unrecognizable as a Fallout game. It's a fine line to tread, if a skill isn't used much in the first game and you balance the system by merging it or removing it for the next game why bother trying to think up things to do for the other skills. Why not just concentrate on combat and to a lesser extent speech with a few mini games for the rest?
Oh goodie, straw men.
Why are you suggesting that limiting the options inside the game is an equally viable alternative that I should support?

requiem said:
I'm not entirely against some changes such as getting rid of energy weapons (adding science to the to hit calculation for weapons flagged energy) or merging unarmed and melee
(neither skill is meant to be a formal martial art and you are as likely to use you fists, feet, elbows and even headbutts as much as your weapon) changing non combat skills is another kettle of fish. Not every first aider is a doctor, having a single medical skill allows the character to perform complex surgeries wether it's in character or not.
Yes, and not everyone who knows a lot about physics knows a lot about chemistry either. So maybe we should split up Science into its constituent parts as well.


requiem said:
On the other hand having separate skills does allow for more role playing rather than roll playing. What would balance the skills though is allowing medium to high doctor to be able to also use first aid.
Eyech. That makes it even harder to properly balance.

requiem said:
No it wasn't offered in Fallout but that doesn't mean that every Future Fallout game or mod has to offer the same games. It's your character playing after all, with just a front end offering you a choice to bet or not and if so how much, something that could be changed to reflect a poker or other game. But if you take out the skill then you limit the choice of games to those that rely on pure luck, you limit the role playing to playing just a lucky character or not.
Ehm, yes, that's more or less the point of gambling, you know.

requiem said:
Why should there be a serious need for anything in the game? Unless the game is hideously overly scripted. That was the beauty of Fallout and SPECIAL for me, there wasn't a proscribed method to play.
Not my point. I never claimed there was a proscribed method of play, nor did I claim that one mode of play was inherently better than another mode. I was commenting merely on the usefulness of skills inside the game. That's all.

requiem said:
Yes you did, though you've just modified it with the exclusion of combat skills from your rebalancing. How is 'equally useful' not efficient? How is 'equal opportunity for every skill' not an efficient use?
Efficient is purely semantics. I was responding to your claiming that I said that every skill should be usable in every single possible event, which is ridiculous and not even near what I claimed.
 
just a thought

i played lion heart and "special" worked great in that game. to say it doesn't work in other games and only fallout would be untrue. sorry for not capitalizing, my shift key is stuck. anyways, seriously the "special" system can work in any game really as long as its similar to fallout. im sad no games like fallout will ever be created again, it went outta style. id love to play another icewindale with the same graphics and view. really i mean that!!!!! of course your all going in depth with this debate, but hell im just saying "special" is a pretty well thought out system and i hope fallout 3 is as close to it as possible. its indeed special ;)
 
Sander said:
Ehm, yes it does.
Yet again: I know that you can do everything Fallout allows you to do with SPECIAL. That's not the point.
And I'm not talking about character builds either, because you can always make a weak character if you want to. Again: not the point.
The point is that the system is *internally* unbalanced. The skills that cost the same amount to improve, are not equally powerful. Fact. Hence, there is an imbalance. Fact.
I don't see how you can possibly refute this.
The imbalance is in the environment, not the system. Fact! If you are laying concrete slabs and get an uneven surface do you chip away at the slabs or level the ground first? The skills aren't equally powerful because the game doesn't make use of them. That does not make SPECIAL unbalanced.

Sander said:
Oh goodie, straw men.
Why are you suggesting that limiting the options inside the game is an equally viable alternative that I should support?
No that's what you are suggesting, take away skills you take away options or reduce non combat actions to the level of turning on a light switch. Again if the game doesn't allow for it you can't do it.

Sander said:
Yes, and not everyone who knows a lot about physics knows a lot about chemistry either. So maybe we should split up Science into its constituent parts as well.
Why not? It would be better than taking skills away.

Sander said:
Eyech. That makes it even harder to properly balance.
Not really, easily done with a little imagination.

Sander said:
Ehm, yes, that's more or less the point of gambling, you know.
Again I'd think some professional gamblers would disagree with you there.

Sander said:
Not my point. I never claimed there was a proscribed method of play, nor did I claim that one mode of play was inherently better than another mode. I was commenting merely on the usefulness of skills inside the game. That's all.
Sorry I thought that was your point entirely. You only want skills that there are a serious need for.

Sander said:
Efficient is purely semantics. I was responding to your claiming that I said that every skill should be usable in every single possible event, which is ridiculous and not even near what I claimed.
No I said that you wanted to reduce the skills to the most efficient level, then I said that still wouldn't provide a system that was balanced without having every skill usable for every event. Which is not saying that you said that every skill should be usable in every single possible event. I am saying that by wanting every skill useful you want them efficient, roll playing as you pointed out.
 
Re: just a thought

goffy59 said:
i played lion heart and "special" worked great in that game.
That's funny. I played the demo for 5 minutes and then I uninstalled it when combat turned out to be very diablo-like (and almost unplayable).
 
requiem_for_a_starfury said:
The imbalance is in the environment, not the system. Fact! If you are laying concrete slabs and get an uneven surface do you chip away at the slabs or level the ground first? The skills aren't equally powerful because the game doesn't make use of them. That does not make SPECIAL unbalanced.
And yet yet yet yet *yet* again: yes it does. It does not work balanced in the environment it was specifically created for. Hence it is unbalanced.
You have yet to refute this, and all you've been able to say 'Yeah, but you can create an environment in which it is balanced' which is possible for pretty much *any* random system.

requiem said:
No that's what you are suggesting, take away skills you take away options or reduce non combat actions to the level of turning on a light switch. Again if the game doesn't allow for it you can't do it.
Stop twisting my words, I've explained a dozen times already that removing options in the game is *not* what I support, but that balancing the system *while keeping the options intact* is what I support.
Not everything needs a supporting skill to be possible.

requiem said:
Why not? It would be better than taking skills away.
Why? As long as this does not limit options, why would it possibly be bad to take away skills?
Also, if you can't see that splitting up science even further is a bad idea...well, I don't know what to say really. Spamming as many skills as possible is ridiculous.
requiem said:
Again I'd think some professional gamblers would disagree with you there.
Are you going to continue to fire off one-liners with no support whatsoever? I've explained *in depth* what is and isn't gambling. You have not been able to refute *any* of my points on gambling, yet you continue to say that I'm wrong. This is absolutely retarded.

requiem said:
Sorry I thought that was your point entirely. You only want skills that there are a serious need for.
Yes, and that is not the same as proscribing *one* mode of play. All it means is that all of the options available to a person should be equally powerful, so it is in fact the exact opposite of proscribing one mode of play.

requiem said:
No I said that you wanted to reduce the skills to the most efficient level, then I said that still wouldn't provide a system that was balanced without having every skill usable for every event. Which is not saying that you said that every skill should be usable in every single possible event. I am saying that by wanting every skill useful you want them efficient, roll playing as you pointed out.
Which is a complete twist of what I am saying.
I also don't see how having to be able to use every skill for every event is the only way to balance this. Suppose you have a system of three skills if you then have one quest that can be solved using one of those skills and another using either of the other two skills then you have a system which is balanced and wherein each skill is equally powerful yet not every skill is used for every quest.
Again: I am *not* talking about builds but about skills themselves.
 
Back
Top