Weekly Poll 11/18/18 - Skills!

[Sardukhar]

Skills - drive car, ski - are different than perks in the sense that they represent the capability to perform an action, or at least a chance of same.

Perks typically represent advantages brought about by certain levels of skills that either aid that skill in a specific way or aid in actions in the world where that skill might be useful.

Ride bike - skill. Checked when you try to ride a bike or when that bike is going fast around a curve.

"No Hands!" Ride Bike - perk. Now allows you to use your hands for other things. Not that. You're disgusting. Who eats ice cream while biking? YOU COULD DROP IT YOU FOOL. Precious ice cream. But, I digress. Ice cream.

Skills are often used as a gate to gear as well.

Video games like perks, because a simple percentage check takes control away from players. They hate that. It's also boring if it happens frequently.

As of now, we know skills are in the game. Dunno about perks.

So this week I'm thinking the Skills poll - should skills be a check to succeed (Option 1, minimum skill to pass, Option 2, percentage based on skill to pass) a la Persuasion, a gate to use items like Really Big Shotguns or Fancier Drugs or a combination of the two? And also, would people like Perks?

List of Polls to date: https://forums.cdprojektred.com/index.php?threads/collected-weekly-polls-thread.10984601/

 

[BaalNergal]

I would like a perk to be able to use my combat skills for diplomacy and bartering.

Gunboat diplomacy is a legitimate method of negotiation.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

2, 4 and 8.

That's the way to go. They're all even even numbers and divisble with eachoter. If that's not a sign of a road to perfection, I don't know what is!!1!

Interesting and fairly unpredictable gameplay where skills do play an actual role all the time instead of just gating stuff. That should be the goal of any selfrespecting RPG.

 

[Matchst1ckk]

Really just don't want 6. I hate "critical" because it's all chance regardless of the skill check. If "every decision matters" and "can affect Night City and the game as you play", basing even some of these results on a chance critical would be really annoying.

Although in typing this out, I noticed that it would be a nice hommage to the tabletop RPG game of which this game is based on. Still, it's far from what I would consider ideal.

 

[Poison19]

2 and 8. Because i prefer chance of pass more than hard gates and also i like perks, especially when they includes some disadvantages.

 

[KakitaTatsumaru]

1, 4 an 9.

1 is because I don't like to have to roll a dice, I prefer when it is already rolled + it makes skills used outside of action gameplay irrelevant because of savescumming. And finally, the better reason: odds of failure are generally ridiculously high or low compared to reality: For example when you work on a panelboard, either you know what you are doing then your odds should be near 100% or either you don't then your odds should be near 0%. There is almost no middle ground, but that's what we gets in games, odds like 63%.

4 because nothing ever prevent someone to try to use gear, even if not totally correctly. If I've been able to use a 2nd world war turret from a bunker then I don't really see something which prevent the use of a gear.

9 because is an action is doable with a skill, them it should not be roadblocked behind a perk. But it can be blocked behind just skill level (using the hard gate logic).

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

In regards to 3 and 4... My vote stays at 4, but I would like to see soft gates for certain gear where before reaching it, V is just extra clumsier. For example; Strength requirements for weapons that further modifies accuracy and recoil control. Certain requirements for certain type of body armor, lacking of which would just make V move slower/clumsier. Soft skill thresholds of vehicles of certain higher amounts of speed and acceleration that make V's handling of them bad even from the get go. Etc.

That kind of stuff. But everyone should be able to try, so no blocking of that with skills or stats.

And as far as perks go... I don't like "special abilities" like "now you can slide on the floor; add a second rank and you can slide further", or "now you can pistolwhip; you had no idea it could be done before, but now you do, and you do it like a champ". No. That's boring. I'd rather see perks open up specifics that are already controlled by the governing skill. Kind of like.... widening the skills applicability. For example, if you have skill for doctoring and pick up (or learn by reading... what ever the ways of acquiring them) a perk for anatomy, you might learn something extra while performing what the skill governs that you can then use later on in a related conversation or some specific tasks where that knowledge boosts up your results (if succesful) for slightly different outcome, or perhaps you can spot injuries and/or ailments on others that you otherwise couldn't. Perhaps you can even extend that knowledge to combat (e.g. getting bonuses to hitting and injuring limbs; or getting a bonus to crit damage).

Btw, before things get out of hand here.... @Sardukhar Since this a poll about "Skills - How?" were you thinking of making a poll about "What skills?"

 

[Rawls]

4 & 8 are the ones I picked. My ideal mix I don't really see above. I really don't like % chances as a mechanic and hard gates are overly simplistic. IMO, skill check systems out to try and represent the skill actually being used. I.E. persuasion as a skill I think would make more dialogue options available and at a high enough level perhaps highlight the dialogue option that will be most successful. That represents finding the right words and way to say something. Gear and skills should definitely play together mechanically, but I think all gear ought to be available assuming you can get your hands on it. Also, I definitely like the idea of perks and skills interplay. Perks being things in which I can invest skillpoints/perkpoints in and skills being the result of progress over time. That seems a very intuitive way to build a character IMO.

 

[EngryEngineer]

For me it is 2, 7, & 8.

I like the idea that if something is not difficult, like driving an AI assisted vehicle at regular speeds without exceptional conditions (like a chase, terrible weather, etc) that we don't need a check. The same goes for a task that is relatively easy because of the skill level of the person doing it, like drawing an established cartoon character like Homer Simpson, if I did it I would expect a skill check because I might have a 1, but if an experienced career illustrator could replicate that design in their sleep. Then I like the idea of having additional techniques (perks in this case) that you can learn to do with higher levels of skills, though I'd prefer if they weren't just rudimentary uses of the skill but interesting things you can do with it.

As far as gear gating goes, I'm not sure, on one hand I think characters should have the opportunity to try to use pretty much anything they want, though if they lack the skill they have no hope and it could be dangerous. I know enough about guns to turn off/on a safety, I know the basics of how several different guns load, and I've fired a few, so maybe I've got a 1 in my skill. If I pick up a big machine gun and try to fire it, I don't have any idea what to expect for recoil or kickback, not only am I not familiar with that specific weapon, my lack of skill is directly related to my lack of general experience so I lack even a frame of reference for a weapon like this. I could easily dislocate my shoulder, lose control of the weapon entirely, all sorts of issues, and I could see just gating the weapon to an appropriate skill level rather than trying to code around the disastrous decision to fire a gun that is beyond my skill. Ultimately though it is a game design question, do you think it is a better decision to give the player the option of attempting an impossible action (which many take having that option as the implication that it is theoretically possible) or do you lock that off until they have some chance at success?

 

[Sardukhar]

Btw, before things get out of hand here.... @Sardukhar Since this a poll about "Skills - How?" were you thinking of making a poll about "What skills?"

Yes I was. Skills are in the game so far, so we will proceed on the assumption there will be some.

Dunno if that next or perks next or combo though.

Although what kind of skills comes down to "skills I can't easily do in-game, like Social and Tech" and "Skills I can do in game, like combat and drive" and then varieties of those.

 

[metalmaniac21]

I want both hard gates+%-calculations. There are and should be ingame situations were skill level check is beyond player characters skill lets say, by 1 point in favor of skill check. In this situation, luck kicks in, luck as in a way to move the universal balance to the players side, say 10*LK stat%/ThatDifferenceBetweenSkillCheckAndPlayerSkill. IIRC luck is not present in CP2077.

 

[Suhiira]

1 1/2 and 5.

Certain skill checks should be pass-fail based in skill level, can you open this lock; others should be passable part of the time, as in can you hit your target.

And I absolutely hate level gated gear, period!

 

[BaalNergal]

Yes I was. Skills are in the game so far, so we will proceed on the assumption there will be some.

Dunno if that next or perks next or combo though.

Although what kind of skills comes down to "skills I can't easily do in-game, like Social and Tech" and "Skills I can do in game, like combat and drive" and then varieties of those.

Perks next, then what skills, then if there should be level limits.

 

[ihavacoolname]

I find that the poll doesn't allow, even in a loose interpretation of the choices, for the full range of opinions on the question. I think, for example, that skill challenges should be soft-gated. I also think that certain gear--but not most--should be hard-gated (or at least have functionality that is hard-gated). It also depends on what CDPR does for the character system.

 

[Maude_Beaulac]

One thing I love in RPG game is that ony one can pick up a tool or weapon. but not having the skill means possible catastrophic faillier. example, you pick a gun up it as safty one, you don't know how to remove it, does not work. you pick the gun up safty is off, you never seen a gun and look down the barrel pull the trigger and shoot your self.

Not having the skill for some thing does not mean not able to use it in some way. luck or bacd luck may let you use it, result may varry. LOL

 

[metalmaniac21]

One thing I love in RPG game is that ony one can pick up a tool or weapon. but not having the skill means possible catastrophic faillier. example, you pick a gun up it as safty one, you don't know how to remove it, does not work. you pick the gun up safty is off, you never seen a gun and look down the barrel pull the trigger and shoot your self.

I too love critical failures in Fallout 2 due to bad luck and general lack of knowledge of how to use a weapon translated to the screen as low hit % even at close distance. It's an edge to walk on that makes the game more fun, because critical failures are hard to be mad at since it looks like something out of a Mr. Bean show.

Something tells me that CDPR have different thing in mind for the word "fun".

 

[BaalNergal]

One thing I love in RPG game is that ony one can pick up a tool or weapon. but not having the skill means possible catastrophic faillier. example, you pick a gun up it as safty one, you don't know how to remove it, does not work. you pick the gun up safty is off, you never seen a gun and look down the barrel pull the trigger and shoot your self.

Not having the skill for some thing does not mean not able to use it in some way. luck or bacd luck may let you use it, result may varry. LOL

I too love critical failures in Fallout 2 due to bad luck and general lack of knowledge of how to use a weapon translated to the screen as low hit % even at close distance. It's an edge to walk on that makes the game more fun, because critical failures are hard to be mad at since it looks like something out of a Mr. Bean show.

Something tells me that CDPR have different thing in mind for the word "fun".

This worked well in Fallout 2 for one simple reason: It was a post-apocalyptic wasteland set over a century after said apocalypse. That gave it time for both learned knowledge and cultural knowledge to degrade and a lot of easily-picked-up pieces of information to simply filter out of use; for example, how to use power armor, which was apparently quite easy for someone with 2070s knowledge but required specific training in most of the games.

In real life? Most people get the very basics of how a gun works just from watching media. If you watch the right media, you even learn to check the safety and a somewhat useful shooting stance. And that's with the majority of people being unfamiliar with firearms.

CP2077? A basic familiarity with firearms is simply part of daily life for a large portion of Night City's population. People having no friggin' clue how a gun works simply doesn't make any logical sense given the setting.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Don’t worry, you’ll be aiming yourself, so it probably doesn’t matter at all what the skill says about knowing or not knowing how to handle guns.

The note of crit fails, though, is a bit faulty. I don’t remember the full formula Fallout had for them, but it’s not really about skill or knowledge. Crit fail is more just a BIG mistake (as far as I know) that happens to anyone every once in a while, even the skilled people.

 

[Poison19]

How are you imaging critical failure in FPP?

 

[BaalNergal]

How are you imaging critical failure in FPP?

Firing a missile or grenade launcher too close to your position, or accidentally dropping a grenade at your own feet. Or one-shotting someone on your side.

At least, that's the only time I've ever seen it.