The learn-by-doing thing should also please the "realism" crowd, since that's kinda how the human brain works.
Is this actually how progression is going to function in CP?
The learn-by-doing thing should also please the "realism" crowd, since that's kinda how the human brain works.
Seems so for skills (but not perks). Gathering sources to edit in ...Is this actually how progression is going to function in CP?
Yep, I've posted the tweet in several places, but I understand not everybody has time or the inclination to read through a bunch of threads.Is this actually how progression is going to function in CP?
Haven't yet ... but it'll end up in there.Perhaps update the unofficial Q&A if you haven't already?
Yep, I've posted the tweet in several places, but I understand not everybody has time or the inclination to read through a bunch of threads.
Thanks @Rawls for posting. Perhaps update the unofficial Q&A if you haven't already?'
Right on.Added to Dev Answers a day or two ago.
As long as they keep the number of perks down to a dull roar and make them minor bonuses not game changing advantages it shouldn't be a problem.On the one hand I get why they're doing it like that, but on the other it was really painful in Skyrim because of how perk dependent it got at later levels.
I don't think skills are related to perks.On the one hand I get why they're doing it like that, but on the other it was really painful in Skyrim because of how perk dependent it got at later levels.
I don't think skills are related to perks.
It should be. Enderal did the opposite and it did not work well...you could perform some high skill ability, like a cool combat technique, without actually having any training in it. It made absolutely no sense and progression was more diluted as result.
Perks should feel unique, more direct talents and abilities in specific skill, so two characters equally trained in same skill can play completely differently. This is what mod overhauls like Ordinator do well. And why Action rpgs have better perks ( than classic rpgs): they more directly affect gameplay ( often with player skill factor involved).
For skill, like small firearms, improvement in every rank would make your basic handling better: recoil, crosshair, draw speed, etc.
Perks are more specific, should make you extraordinarily talented in certain base function or you could do something different with it.
I'm hoping all these three will be intertwined. Stats as char defining attributes and basic passive benefits/malus, skill as generic proficiency, perks as extraordinary talents and abilities with skills acting as their prerequisites and stats will augment/synergize with their effects and of certain cyberware.
Perk: Fast dodge. Pre requisite: Athletics, rank 3. For characters with high Reflexes, it becomes faster with better response time. For max Reflexes you also gain certain I frames.
This is what gives the system depth.
Well I think augs will be more analogous to cyberware. But yes, % increases are not mechanically interesting.
Nah, I think Perks will be related to the classes. I think skills are something everybody can do.
So, netrunner, techie, and solo perks, but all three classes CAN hack, all three classes CAN shoot, all three classes CAN use engineering stuff, but some classes are better at it than others, and maybe theres specific perks that enhance your abilities or unlock new things.
By separate, I mean they are distinct.
The reason I'm so excited is because a lot of people here thought that skills and perks were the same thing, just with different words describing them. Now, we have confirmation that they are separate but almost certainly intertwined progression systems. So, layers of progression.
They confirmed there is no "class system", that they're going for something more fluid. I'm 99% sure they were referring to perks there. This reminds me of Amalur.
OK, you don't seem to be grasping what I'm saying. I'll try to explain more clearly.
First, I understand there's no hard classes. However, Techie, Netrunner, and Solo are represented in the form of perk trees.
"So, netrunner, techie, and solo perks, but all three classes CAN hack, all three classes CAN shoot, all three classes CAN use engineering stuff, but some classes are better at it than others, and maybe theres specific perks that enhance your abilities or unlock new things. "
To simplify this:
You go into your character menu, you see two separate windows: Perks and Skills. Skills list all of the various things that every "class" can do, regardless of the perks they've chosen. Hacking, shooting, sneaking, etc.
- Yes, there will be perks.
- I believe those perks will be in three separate "trees," representing Techie, Solo, and Netrunner. CDPR's words seem to confirm this.
- Yes, the "classes" are not set in stone. It's a fluid system. I know that. They are still represented and you can specialize if you wish.
- Skills are independent of perks. It might intertwine here and there, it might not. But they are distinct.
- In other words, it is not a Skyrim-style perk system, where the perks are DIRECTLY nested under skills. Rather, it's a class based perk system, where perks are for each class. Not each skill.
I understand if there's possibly a language barrier (or maybe I'm just not explaining well enough), but hopefully that made more sense.
Here's a picture, to show how I envision it:
View attachment 10974002
Separate, very possibly with some stuff intertwining. But notice how this is different than Skyrim's perk and skill system.
Ah, okay. Well yes, in that case, we are in the same boat. I loved New Vegas' system, but I admit I didn't find most of the perks terribly interesting.I understand what you're saying, where I disagree is that they should be ( mostly) independent of skills.
We know Hacking will be a skill. And that there will be perks for Netrunner. How on earth could someone be a great Netrunner while this being completely unrelated to his/her hacking skill?
Probably Fallout New Vegas is a better example, perks structure in form of a "list", pick and choose. Worse visual style and structure, but more open and easier to implement.