It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
Jonesy89: Do you consider Temple of Elemental Evil to be 'idiot friendly' for showing the AOE of spells? I mean, TOEE is no Darkest Dungeon, but I wouldn't exactly call it a cakewalk.
avatar
Hickory: Yes, I do. Cakewalk ≠ idiot friendly.
I'm genuinely curious now. What does 'idiot friendly' mean to you?
avatar
Hickory: Yes, I do. Cakewalk ≠ idiot friendly.
avatar
Jonesy89: I'm genuinely curious now. What does 'idiot friendly' mean to you?
Having your hand held.
avatar
Jonesy89: I'm genuinely curious now. What does 'idiot friendly' mean to you?
avatar
Hickory: Having your hand held.
And at what point does a HUD/gameplay interface element cross the line into hand-holding?
avatar
Hickory: Having your hand held.
avatar
Jonesy89: And at what point does a HUD/gameplay interface element cross the line into hand-holding?
Not the point. You can be give a difficult task and perform it yourself, or you can be given a difficult task and have somebody guide you through it, step by step. One is idiot friendly, the other is not.
avatar
Jonesy89: And at what point does a HUD/gameplay interface element cross the line into hand-holding?
avatar
Hickory: Not the point. You can be give a difficult task and perform it yourself, or you can be given a difficult task and have somebody guide you through it, step by step. One is idiot friendly, the other is not.
Except having the interface in a turn-based(-ish) game tell you what area is affected by an AOE doesn't walk you through anything. If the game wouldn't stop tutorializing the mechanic or insisted on targeting the spell without player input, that would be a pretty egregious example of handholding. Making the HUD provide data doesn't walk the player through anything. It simply provides them with the information needed in order for them to make an informed decision; it does so in much the same way that a character's health bar shows how close the PC is to dying, so that a player can determine when they need to heal or retreat.
low rated
avatar
Jonesy89: Making the HUD provide data doesn't walk the player through anything.
Yes it does. It tells them exactly where the spell is going to land, including AOE. There's no such target reticule painted for arrows (or guns in other games). It's walking them through exactly where to aim, but not only that, the aiming is taken away; it's done for the player.
avatar
Engerek01: Yes. It would be funny mages were real and there appeared a highlight whenever they were aiming. Dont you think?
avatar
Jonesy89: You mean as funny as everyone having a visual indicator showing how close they are to dying? Just saying, if the problem people have with expecting a visual indicator about what AOE is covered by a spell is that it isn't realistic, it begs the question: what makes it any different from other HUD elements and whatnot?
Very simple. D&D is based on points, the damage and health you gain is calculated by Dices. So you have to have a health indicator. And if you are talking about the "close to death" signs over enemies, that is perfectly realistic since it tells you the condition of your enemy. Just like when you are in a fight in real life. On the other hand, there is absolutely no necessity for a visual indicator so there is not one.

The hand holding Hikkory metions went extreme with games like WOW and Diablo 3. Those games litterally assumed that players are not capable of distributing stat (ability) points by themselves so those games do that for you. So we ended up with so called RPGs where you cant even decide your own Strenght points.

Baldur's Gate is not that and we love that game because of this.
avatar
Hickory: I'm unsure of your point here.
Mostly, I just wanted to say that I like to hit things; it wasn't a rebuttal. I definitely underutilized my mages when I played.

There really wasn't much of a point, except on my sword! (Ha!)
avatar
Hickory: I'm unsure of your point here.
avatar
Bookwyrm627: Mostly, I just wanted to say that I like to hit things; it wasn't a rebuttal. I definitely underutilized my mages when I played.

There really wasn't much of a point, except on my sword! (Ha!)
I see. Thanks.
One interesting point:

If you look at the spells I mentioned, none of them target enemies. Therefore, when using them, you don't need to worry about accidentally hitting allies or dealing with magic resistance or saving throws. The only one that enemy spell protections can affect is Melf's Minute Meteors, and that spell is actually good for dealing with them, because each hit takes 3 levels off them, or 15 off per round of attacks.

Also, I note that, at high levels, mages tank better than fighters.
avatar
Bookwyrm627: Mostly, I just wanted to say that I like to hit things; it wasn't a rebuttal. I definitely underutilized my mages when I played.

There really wasn't much of a point, except on my sword! (Ha!)
avatar
Hickory: I see. Thanks.
Hickory, If you were any drier you'd turn to dust and blow away.
low rated
avatar
Hickory: I see. Thanks.
avatar
richlind33: Hickory, If you were any drier you'd turn to dust and blow away.
Do you have a point, or are you always making useless, inane remarks?
avatar
richlind33: Hickory, If you were any drier you'd turn to dust and blow away.
avatar
Hickory: Do you have a point, or are you always making useless, inane remarks?
I'm going to find you a sense of humor even if it kills you....I mean me. ;p
low rated
avatar
Hickory: Do you have a point, or are you always making useless, inane remarks?
avatar
richlind33: I'm going to find you a sense of humor even if it kills you....I mean me. ;p
So it's the latter then. I thought so.
avatar
Hickory: Do you have a point, or are you always making useless, inane remarks?
Swords for everyone! :D