As I understand it from the 'teaser', is a turn-based system supposed to be used? Maybe that's not the worst thing (as it was in Divinity: OS). However, many people who are fans of this kind of setting also like the real-time combat (like Baldur's Gate or Pillars of Eternity). Perhaps you should implement both of these systems at the start of the game concept and let the player make his own choices before the game starts? --- Do you want to use turn-based combat or 'classical' system?
I'd also like to know how combat will be resolved, but I believe you'll have to choose one or the other, as turn-based combat requires different balancing. The other crucial issue for me is whether you will release on operating systems other than Windows.
What I've seen looks great so far; I'll be watching for updates.
Generally when I hear a game described as a "Tactical RPG" I think turn based. I generally favor RTWP, but I enjoy both. For me it's more about the world and the story.
The game is going to be turn-based. We wanted to stay more faithful to the Tabletop feeling, where everyone takes turn according to initiative order. With our current system, it is unfortunately not so easy to allow the player to choose between RTWP & Turn-base
If this is a tactics game mostly, I'm happy with the turn-based approach. The description says something about personalities and dialogue though. Does this mean that there's gonna be roleplay involved (like, let's say, Pillars of Eternity) also or just "flavour" dialogue as it was in Icewind Dale, for example?
I also very strongly prefer RTwP and generally dislike TB games, so I will be looking for more information on this game before I decide on backing it. If the TB system is NOT anything like the D:OS games' system, then that will be a plus as I really hated combat in the D:OS games.
But, as @Sapistas asked, is this game going to be truly a ROLE-PLAYING game, with emphasis on the story, character development, dialog, interactions, choice and consequence, etc.? Or, just a tactical combat focused dungeon crawler? This is the most important question for me. If the former, I'm in. If the latter, I'm out.
Personally I love the turn-based approach. I believe it simulates the table-top experience much more closely. From what I have read/watched there will be a mix of narrative choice and tactical combat.
Well, PoE2 have recently introduced an option to switch between turn based and real time so mayhaps it can be implemented here later as well. I personally have no preference as both these systems can be done right and wrong. So we ll have to wait and see.
Intelligent Evil
If the game is merely going to be a tabletop simulator, then by definition there should not be a single-player option and you should only be able to play it multiplayer, because single-player is incompatible with a tabletop experience.
People always throw out those words "simulate tabletop experience" as though they are magic words that automatically justify TB for every single game. If I wanted to play a tabletop game, I'd go play a tabletop game.
This being said, TB has already been chosen for the game so the point is moot. The question that remains is whether the game is merely a dungeon crawler or a true RPG. Or, put another way, how much of the game is combat? Is it part of the game but not most of it? Or is it most of the game?
It is going to be, at heart, a Tactical RPG - meaning there will be a story, dialog, choices, etc etc. It's not going to be "just Dungeon Crawling" if that's your concern.
Also another thing to note is we want to stay true to the Tabletop experience - that is not to say we want to be a Tabletop simulator (by the way if that's your jam, check out Talespire it looks positively awesome).
It's currently not planned to add an option to switch between Turn-Based and RTwP settings - as you can imagine, this would mean quite a lot of work to balance out everything properly, and we would rather focus on polishing Solasta as much as possible with one option rather than giving a "meh" experience with both options.
Thank you @Myzzrym. That helps ease some of my concerns for now. I expect we will get more details at the KS stage. A few more questions if you will indulge me:
1) Will the game include outdoor/wilderness areas?
2) Will there be possibilities for working around or avoiding combat while still achieving goals and completing quests? And if so, will we be penalized in terms of XPs or loot for having avoided combat? In TB games, precisely because I dislike TB, I choose non-combat paths as much as possible when they are available. But obviously I don't want to lose out on anything as a result.
3) Are the four arch-type classes you currently have listed the only classes you are planning for now?
4) Any chance of reconsidering party size, meaning to go up to six? Related to Q3 above, if you add other classes to the game in the future, having those additional two party slots becomes imperative because otherwise no one will use the other classes since we will always need the four arch-type classes in our party. This also then severely limits replayability of the game.
I am glad the game is turn based ,allowing both mode would be quite absurd, Pillar of eternity 2 tactical depth is close to zero,right click your group tank and spank . Please, please do not follow obsidian path.
To be faithful to pen and paper system , it has to be turn based , encounters hand made and balanced according to the party size. From my experience as DM a group of 4 allow enough tactical options it works perfectly well . Go on with your design vision, and please do not let yourself influenced too much by forums :)
What i'd like to know is your approach to the turn based system, will you bastardize it with cooldowns aka divinity original sin , or will it be a vancian system with limited number of spells and abilities by day + rest spots between a few encounters ?
1) Will the game include outdoor/wilderness areas?
Yes
2) Will there be possibilities for working around or avoiding combat while still achieving goals and completing quests? And if so, will we be penalized in terms of XPs or loot for having avoided combat? In TB games, precisely because I dislike TB, I choose non-combat paths as much as possible when they are available. But obviously I don't want to lose out on anything as a result.
We will talk about that later^^
3) Are the four arch-type classes you currently have listed the only classes you are planning for now?
No, those are the 4 classes we are 100% sure we'll have, but we are planning for more (keep an eye out for Kickstarter)
4) Any chance of reconsidering party size, meaning to go up to six? Related to Q3 above, if you add other classes to the game in the future, having those additional two party slots becomes imperative because otherwise no one will use the other classes since we will always need the four arch-type classes in our party. This also then severely limits replayability of the game.
Party-size is likely to remain as four - it is something that has been decided a long time ago, and unless there are major changes we're probably sticking with four.
I am glad the game is turn based ,allowing both mode would be quite absurd, Pillar of eternity 2 tactical depth is close to zero,right click your group tank and spank . Please, please do not follow obsidian path.
Turn-based all the way! :D
To be faithful to pen and paper system , it has to be turn based , encounters hand made and balanced according to the party size. From my experience as DM a group of 4 allow enough tactical options it works perfectly well . Go on with your design vision, and please do not let yourself influenced too much by forums :)
That's the hardest part about Party size, there's no "correct" answer. Some people prefer less, some people prefer more, and they all have good reasons for it.
What i'd like to know is your approach to the turn based system, will you bastardize it with cooldowns aka divinity original sin , or will it be a vancian system with limited number of spells and abilities by day + rest spots between a few encounters ?
We aim to stay as faithful as possible to the 5th edition ruleset^^
We aim to stay as faithful as possible to the 5th edition ruleset^^
This makes me very happy to hear. In truth, I don't think my intense dislike for the D:OS games had to do with TB combat so much as it was their rules-set and mechanics. Combat in D&D 5e is actually quite loose and open, allowing for simultaneous actions, held actions and the like. In fact, it is not "turn" based in a rigid and strict sense but rather it is initiative and rounds based, which is quite different.
Will this game be moddable (such that someone could possibly create a RTwP mod for it)?
Something I've never seen in other games ... will there be the possibility of being able to escape from too tough fights?
Usually in other games if the fight is too difficult it is reload and avoided until you are strong enough.
It would be nice to be able to "postpone" the fight even without reloading, perhaps making the characters become exhausted or with some temporary penalty that can be eliminated after having rested.