I'm not enjoying the Praetor (new player)

[Citronvand]

I started as a Praetor, thinking it was a knight/diplomat like the game tells you, aka not just a big brute. Hah, I should have known better, every single fight, EVERY SINGLE FIGHT is at a big disadvantage when I've played as a Praetor. Even though I poisoned the mining camp, I still couldn't kill the 3 remaining soldiers.

So I rerolled, putting even more points into combat, effectively negating the diplomat side of the Praetor which was not something I wanted to do. But I didn't want to play a pacifist either, just a decent fighter and a decent diplomat, but no, decent is apparently not good enough.

So now, with my new fighter Praetor I could just barely kill the 3 soldiers. Had to go back afterwards because I had 3 HP. When I returned, I killed the rest and... a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ trap blocks the way inside. Went back and reported in, hoping it would be removed. But no, it's still there as constant "♥♥♥♥ you" reminder that the game hates combat characters, even though there are now characters in the mine.

It really sucks the fun out of the game. Especially since ~80% of the game appeals to me, I very much enjoy turn based RPGs based on PnP. The combat mechanics is actually pretty good. I also like the Roman feel of the game, quite refreshing. The combat balance however, is completely out the window.

I understand that combat is supposed to be lethal and that I'm not supposed to kill for instance the 2 bandits with the merchant that lured me into a house, that's fine, I don't have a problem with that. I SHOULD die in that example unless I'm very good at combat. But when every single combat experience is like that, it's not fun anymore. I might as well just play a pacifist Praetor.

[Vince]

Playing a fighter/talker is the hardest path through the game because in a nutshell you're playing an avg fighter and an avg talker. I understand the appeal but this option is not for the new players.

So my suggestion is to go with either pure diplomat (then you can deal with the mine without combat) or pure fighter.

Overall, you're almost always at a disadvantage. In most cases your enemies outnumber and outgun you, so you'd have to use all the tools at your disposal to even the odds, but you'll never steamroll over your enemies. You aren't a mighty hero but an average Joe trying to survive in a harsh world.

To encourage you, here are some player submitted builds from this thread:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/230070/discussions/0/490123197946992902/

http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/391044006147489617/6A621927F07A339F3575403E94E72C023EB61C0E/

Str 7, Dex 8, Con 6, Per 8, Int 7, Cha 5, bodycount 155 Hammer 8, Dodge 10, Critical Strike 6, Lore 8, Persuasion 8, Crafting 6, Streetwise 5, etc.

http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/394421705868950440/75C85ECCE7979E440D6445477A35523B8EE33473/

Str 5, Dex 9, Con 5, Per 8, Int 6, Cha 7, bodycount 109 Dagger 9, Dodge 9, Critical Strike 7, Alchemy 6, Streetwise 6, Impersonate 5, etc

http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/382036806896257013/B00403C16CE17A55C23AF08305021966511D6E61/

Str 8, Dex 8, Con 6, Per 8, Int 7, Cha 4, bodycount 328, note that the character has no defense skill and is relying on Critical Strike instead.

Axe 9, Critical Strike 7, Crafting 10, Lore 8, Persuasion 6, Sneak 6

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=536683085
^ knife fighter with Dex 4, a shield, streetwise, and 222 kills.

There is a HUGE variety of builds but you need to know what you're doing.

[Citronvand]

Always appreciate developers that communicate.

Playing a fighter/talker is the hardest path through the game because in a nutshell you're playing an avg fighter and an avg talker.

I don't see why this have to be the case. Do I excpect to win every battle or diplomacy check as a average fighter/diplomat? No, of course not. But struggling to beat a single fight is a bit silly.

So my suggestion is to go with either pure diplomat (then you can deal with the mine without combat) or pure fighter.

I understand that. However, I really don't really like being forced into a certain playstyle. I play quite a few PnP, I'm a roleplayer, not a min/maxer. And I did play a fighter Preator, 10 Str, 8 Dex, 7 Con, 7 Sword, 6 Block, 3 Crit, 9/4 DR + nets. That was NOT enough for the later fights against Carrinas + 2 guards or Imp Guard vs Antidas.

Overall, you're almost always at a disadvantage. In most cases your enemies outnumber and outgun you, so you'd have to use all the tools at your disposal to even the odds, but you'll never steamroll over your enemies.

And that is something I don't like. If my character is smart enough, or/and has enough persuasion e.t.c., but perhaps not enough to completely avoid combat, why couldn't he create a scenario where he is at a advantage and then attack the enemy? Or at least a balanced fight where a average fighter could succeed. Poisoning the camp still meant you were 1 vs 3 and they definitely had the advantage, especially with the crossbow guy. Being at a disadvantage regardless of what you do is not a good design decision in my opinon. It is something I expect from a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ game master that is out for player blood.

You aren't a mighty hero but an average Joe trying to survive in a harsh world.

That's not an excuse for always being at a disadvantage though. Even average Joe can create a scenario where he is in at least a fair fight. Just look from the NPCs perspective, are they heroes? No, they are pretty much average Joes as well. Are they at a disadvantage? Never.

No, you're not playing as a average Joe. You are playing as a character, cursed by the gods, ill fated by the world, luck set to 1, and the only weapon he has is a quicksave/load feature.

I assume you have played Fallout 1? Remember the deathclaw fight? It completely wrecked you. You had to know your ♥♥♥♥ to beat that fight, you character had to have the right skills, the right weapons, good armor, all that stuff. It was a great fight and a great challenge, a lot of fun. But... would I want a game where every single fight is like that? No. That's basically what age of decadence is, from my experience with the Praetor.

To encourage you, here are some player submitted builds from this thread

Thank you for trying to help me. But posting the final builds isn't really going to help me. I don't know how they dealt with the situations, how much they save-scummed, what skills they started with and in what order they advanced them in e.t.c. Not that I want that information, it would essentially be a walkthrough with spoilers.

I'm absolutely sure I can beat the game, it's not that. I could always just look up a build and min/max the ♥♥♥♥ out of the character, then follow a guide if I got stuck. But that's not roleplaying, that's just gaming the system and that playstyle hasn't been fun for me since I stopped using iddqd in classic doom, which was quite a awhile ago.

I apologize if I've sounded rude. Don't get me wrong, there is a lot in the game I really do enjoy, for instance that choices have consequences, that you can't be everything at once ala Elder Scrolls, that you don't gain levels and HP like D&D, the turn based combat and more. It's just the mentioned things I dislike really sucks the joy out of playing the game.

[affairs most succubussian]

I don't see why this have to be the case. Do I excpect to win every battle or diplomacy check as a average fighter/diplomat? No, of course not. But struggling to beat a single fight is a bit silly.
♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, you don't know what you're talking about.

I understand that. However, I really don't really like being forced into a certain playstyle. I play quite a few PnP, I'm a roleplayer, not a min/maxer. And I did play a fighter Preator, 10 Str, 8 Dex, 7 Con, 7 Sword, 6 Block, 3 Crit, 9/4 DR + nets. That was NOT enough for the later fights against Carrinas + 2 guards or Imp Guard vs Antidas.

Yea it was enough. You're just bad.

And that is something I don't like. If my character is smart enough, or/and has enough persuasion e.t.c., but perhaps not enough to completely avoid combat, why couldn't he create a scenario where he is at a advantage and then attack the enemy? Or at least a balanced fight where a average fighter could succeed. Poisoning the camp still meant you were 1 vs 3 and they definitely had the advantage, especially with the crossbow guy. Being at a disadvantage regardless of what you do is not a good design decision in my opinon. It is something I expect from a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ game master that is out for player blood.

Aww, boo hoo. Someone has a different opinion on the game. And guess what? No one cares. Also, D&D /=/ AoD.

That's not an excuse for always being at a disadvantage though. Even average Joe can create a scenario where he is in at least a fair fight. Just look from the NPCs perspective, are they heroes? No, they are pretty much average Joes as well. Are they at a disadvantage? Never.
Ye, a good amount of your fights are fair. You clearly don't know what you're talking about.

No, you're not playing as a average Joe. You are playing as a character, cursed by the gods, ill fated by the world, luck set to 1, and the only weapon he has is a quicksave/load feature. Are you stupid? Genuinely curious.

I'm absolutely sure I can beat the game, it's not that. I could always just look up a build and min/max the ♥♥♥♥ out of the character, then follow a guide if I got stuck. But that's not roleplaying, that's just gaming the system and that playstyle hasn't been fun for me since I stopped using iddqd in classic doom, which was quite a awhile ago.

No. I beat the game a few times without using anyone else's build.




In conclusion: You're bad & wasted 3 mins of my time. Bravo.

[Citronvand]

Originally posted by The Warlock VDS𝟺𝟻:

I don't see why this have to be the case. Do I excpect to win every battle or diplomacy check as a average fighter/diplomat? No, of course not. But struggling to beat a single fight is a bit silly.
♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, you don't know what you're talking about.

I understand that. However, I really don't really like being forced into a certain playstyle. I play quite a few PnP, I'm a roleplayer, not a min/maxer. And I did play a fighter Preator, 10 Str, 8 Dex, 7 Con, 7 Sword, 6 Block, 3 Crit, 9/4 DR + nets. That was NOT enough for the later fights against Carrinas + 2 guards or Imp Guard vs Antidas.

Yea it was enough. You're just bad.

And that is something I don't like. If my character is smart enough, or/and has enough persuasion e.t.c., but perhaps not enough to completely avoid combat, why couldn't he create a scenario where he is at a advantage and then attack the enemy? Or at least a balanced fight where a average fighter could succeed. Poisoning the camp still meant you were 1 vs 3 and they definitely had the advantage, especially with the crossbow guy. Being at a disadvantage regardless of what you do is not a good design decision in my opinon. It is something I expect from a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ game master that is out for player blood.

Aww, boo hoo. Someone has a different opinion on the game. And guess what? No one cares. Also, D&D /=/ AoD.

That's not an excuse for always being at a disadvantage though. Even average Joe can create a scenario where he is in at least a fair fight. Just look from the NPCs perspective, are they heroes? No, they are pretty much average Joes as well. Are they at a disadvantage? Never.
Ye, a good amount of your fights are fair. You clearly don't know what you're talking about.

No, you're not playing as a average Joe. You are playing as a character, cursed by the gods, ill fated by the world, luck set to 1, and the only weapon he has is a quicksave/load feature. Are you stupid? Genuinely curious.

I'm absolutely sure I can beat the game, it's not that. I could always just look up a build and min/max the ♥♥♥♥ out of the character, then follow a guide if I got stuck. But that's not roleplaying, that's just gaming the system and that playstyle hasn't been fun for me since I stopped using iddqd in classic doom, which was quite a awhile ago.

No. I beat the game a few times without using anyone else's build.




In conclusion: You're bad & wasted 3 mins of my time. Bravo.

I'm quite sure Vince doesn't need you to defend him or the game, he seems like a good developer that is able to take criticism and discuss it, unlike you. Love the fact that your arguments is pretty much: "You're wrong, I'm right" with some ad hominem and strawmans sprinkled on it.

In conclusion: you can't handle that someone criticised your favorite game and has a different opinion than yours. Bravo.

[Marcos_DS]

Originally posted by Citronvand:

I understand that. However, I really don't really like being forced into a certain playstyle. I play quite a few PnP, I'm a roleplayer, not a min/maxer. And I did play a fighter Preator, 10 Str, 8 Dex, 7 Con, 7 Sword, 6 Block, 3 Crit, 9/4 DR + nets. That was NOT enough for the later fights against Carrinas + 2 guards or Imp Guard vs Antidas.

Alchemy 4 (or even Alchemy 6) isn't that expensive and greatly expands your tactical options:
* You can throw bombs that have a very good chance to knock your enemy down -> guaranteed hits
* You can poison your weapon. Basically, shoot someone with a poison arrow and run around until the poison wears off (or he dies). Or if you want to do melee, you can focus on defense since you only have to hit once every three rounds (to reapply poison)...
* You can use firebombs to create a barrier the enemy cannot cross. Go into a corner, throw a firebomb, shoot some poisoned arrows at them at watch them die while they cannot reach you (works best with hand crossbow and shield, otherwise they might shoot you dead insteat, if they have ranged weapons)

Remember to use piercing arrows/bolts vs. armored enemies, and torso attack if you are in melee to partially bypass their DR. You already said you use nets, so you know enemies that are very hard to hit can change to easy with +30 to hit chance (and if you do hit, you also poison them...)

I'm sure there are other good tips. You are not forced into a paystyle, he was just saying its harder to play a hybrid and still meet all combat challenges, since some of the early fights can be hard even for dedicated fighters.

[Citronvand]

Originally posted by Marcos_DS:

Originally posted by Citronvand:

I understand that. However, I really don't really like being forced into a certain playstyle. I play quite a few PnP, I'm a roleplayer, not a min/maxer. And I did play a fighter Preator, 10 Str, 8 Dex, 7 Con, 7 Sword, 6 Block, 3 Crit, 9/4 DR + nets. That was NOT enough for the later fights against Carrinas + 2 guards or Imp Guard vs Antidas.

Alchemy 4 (or even Alchemy 6) isn't that expensive and greatly expands your tactical options:
* You can throw bombs that have a very good chance to knock your enemy down -> guaranteed hits
* You can poison your weapon. Basically, shoot someone with a poison arrow and run around until the poison wears off (or he dies). Or if you want to do melee, you can focus on defense since you only have to hit once every three rounds (to reaplly poison)...
* You can use firebombs to create a barrier the enemy cannot cross. Go into a corner, throw a firebomb, shoot some poisoned arrows at them at watch them die while they cannot reach you (works best with hand crossbow and shield, otherwise they might shoot you dead insteat, if they have ranged weapons)

Remember to use piercing arrows/bolts vs. armored enemies, and torso attack if you are in melee to partially bypass their DR. You already said you use nets, so you know enemies that are very hard to hit can change to easy with +30 to hit chance (and if you do hit, you also poison them...)

I'm sure there are other good tips. You are not forced into a paystyle, he was just saying its harder to play a hybrid and still meet all combat challenges, since some of the early fights can be hard even for dedicated fighters.

Thanks for the tips, I have yet to try out alchemy. Currently experimenting with Crafting.

So you're saying that the later fights are easier?

[affairs most succubussian]

Originally posted by Citronvand:

Originally posted by The Warlock VDS𝟺𝟻:

I don't see why this have to be the case. Do I excpect to win every battle or diplomacy check as a average fighter/diplomat? No, of course not. But struggling to beat a single fight is a bit silly.
♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, you don't know what you're talking about.

I understand that. However, I really don't really like being forced into a certain playstyle. I play quite a few PnP, I'm a roleplayer, not a min/maxer. And I did play a fighter Preator, 10 Str, 8 Dex, 7 Con, 7 Sword, 6 Block, 3 Crit, 9/4 DR + nets. That was NOT enough for the later fights against Carrinas + 2 guards or Imp Guard vs Antidas.

Yea it was enough. You're just bad.

And that is something I don't like. If my character is smart enough, or/and has enough persuasion e.t.c., but perhaps not enough to completely avoid combat, why couldn't he create a scenario where he is at a advantage and then attack the enemy? Or at least a balanced fight where a average fighter could succeed. Poisoning the camp still meant you were 1 vs 3 and they definitely had the advantage, especially with the crossbow guy. Being at a disadvantage regardless of what you do is not a good design decision in my opinon. It is something I expect from a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ game master that is out for player blood.

Aww, boo hoo. Someone has a different opinion on the game. And guess what? No one cares. Also, D&D /=/ AoD.

That's not an excuse for always being at a disadvantage though. Even average Joe can create a scenario where he is in at least a fair fight. Just look from the NPCs perspective, are they heroes? No, they are pretty much average Joes as well. Are they at a disadvantage? Never.
Ye, a good amount of your fights are fair. You clearly don't know what you're talking about.

No, you're not playing as a average Joe. You are playing as a character, cursed by the gods, ill fated by the world, luck set to 1, and the only weapon he has is a quicksave/load feature. Are you stupid? Genuinely curious.

I'm absolutely sure I can beat the game, it's not that. I could always just look up a build and min/max the ♥♥♥♥ out of the character, then follow a guide if I got stuck. But that's not roleplaying, that's just gaming the system and that playstyle hasn't been fun for me since I stopped using iddqd in classic doom, which was quite a awhile ago.

No. I beat the game a few times without using anyone else's build.




In conclusion: You're bad & wasted 3 mins of my time. Bravo.

I'm quite sure Vince doesn't need you to defend him or the game, he seems like a good developer that is able to take criticism and discuss it, unlike you. Love the fact that your arguments is pretty much: "You're wrong, I'm right" with some ad hominem and strawmans sprinkled on it.

In conclusion: you can't handle that someone criticised your favorite game and has a different opinion than yours. Bravo.

O man, I didn't mean to bash you with my ad hominem? I love the part where I didn't have any in in my entire few sentences!

This game isn't my favourite by the way. You're just complaining that you're, y'know, bad.

[Vince]

Originally posted by Citronvand:

I don't see why this have to be the case. Do I excpect to win every battle or diplomacy check as a average fighter/diplomat? No, of course not. But struggling to beat a single fight is a bit silly.

In general, struggling is normal as there are no filler fights in the game; every fight is a life-or-death situation. You never breeze through fights.

Naturally, struggles differ from enjoyable to frustrating, which depends on your build, faction (some factions put less pressure on you), even gear (weapon types within weapon class), and your ability to use different attacks and support items with maximum efficiency. I've seen very weak characters that managed to get very far, much further than I expected them, so I can't neither agree or disagree with you without knowing specifics.

I understand that. However, I really don't really like being forced into a certain playstyle. I play quite a few PnP, I'm a roleplayer, not a min/maxer. And I did play a fighter Preator, 10 Str, 8 Dex, 7 Con, 7 Sword, 6 Block, 3 Crit, 9/4 DR + nets. That was NOT enough for the later fights against Carrinas + 2 guards or Imp Guard vs Antidas.

That should have been more than enough. If you want, send me your save game and I'll go through the fight and post my comments after.

And that is something I don't like. If my character is smart enough, or/and has enough persuasion e.t.c., but perhaps not enough to completely avoid combat, why couldn't he create a scenario where he is at a advantage and then attack the enemy?
...


That's not an excuse for always being at a disadvantage though. Even average Joe can create a scenario where he is in at least a fair fight.

That depends entirely on whom Joe is fighting. Low level local conflict? Maybe? Faction politics? It's not a fair fight by definition.

In this game it's you against the world, so to speak. It would be hard to find a scenario where you have the advantage in that "fight".

I assume you have played Fallout 1? Remember the deathclaw fight? It completely wrecked you. You had to know your ♥♥♥♥ to beat that fight, you character had to have the right skills, the right weapons, good armor, all that stuff. It was a great fight and a great challenge, a lot of fun. But... would I want a game where every single fight is like that? No. That's basically what age of decadence is, from my experience with the Praetor.

I killed the deathclaw before it did any real damage, so my experience was a bit different. I love Fallout, it's one of my top 10 RPGs but it was way too easy for me. It was too easy to become an unstoppable juggernaut and wipe out anything that moved against you.

I apologize if I've sounded rude. Don't get me wrong, there is a lot in the game I really do enjoy, for instance that choices have consequences, that you can't be everything at once ala Elder Scrolls, that you don't gain levels and HP like D&D, the turn based combat and more. It's just the mentioned things I dislike really sucks the joy out of playing the game.

I appreciate your feedback. It's always good to look at your game through someone else's eyes, even if we disagree on some matters.

[Marcos_DS]

Originally posted by Citronvand:

Thanks for the tips, I have yet to try out alchemy. Currently experimenting with Crafting.

So you're saying that the later fights are easier?

For me some of the later story fights were somewhat easier because in the beginning i didn't realize how much better you can control the fights if you use nets, bolas, bombs, poison and eventually stims. I actually relied so much on them that i ran out of alchemy supplies in Madoraan (2nd city) to buy (for bombs, that is). So if you want to use them, i would recommend to buy all supplies in the first city before you leave for the second one.

The fights don't get easy, especially some arena fights are still quite hard. But its less scratching your head *how the hell am i supposed to beat that?!*, more *ok that didn't work, damn poison resistance, but maybe i can do x...*

[Citronvand]

Originally posted by Vince:

That should have been more than enough. If you want, send me your save game and I'll go through the fight and post my comments after.

http://s000.tinyupload.com/?file_id=79346438191828229753

I initially tried with 8 sword & 5 block but I later changed it to 7/6. It is the Carrinas fight, I have only tried a few times against Antidas since I didn't want to double-cross him. I eventually beat Carrinas with 3 hp to spare, but it took so many tries, probably over 20, and it was more or less luck. Surely there has to be some consistent way of beating him?

No other battle gave me this much trouble on this character.

It is generally the centurion with the spear that causes troubles, Carrinas himself usually goes down quick since you can put 2 head shots into him before he reaches for his weapons and shield. The Imperial guard doesn't really do that much damage and he doesn't have a helmet either which you can exploit. The centurion is the real challenge. With 5 block I noticed he went for the head(?) a lot which caused a lot of damage, one time he did 17 + 12 damage in 1 turn. With 6 block he doesn't seem to go for the head(?) nearly as much.

[Shining Hector]

Truthfully, Praetor is probably best to try after you've beaten the game a few times, it's easy to get in over your head. It's probably the hardest background to be honest. You miss out on a ton of free skill points since you don't get much extra training from Antidas and don't get the chance to break into the palace. If you want to get the hang of combat, just be a mercenary and join the Imperial Guard, and you'll get plenty of free training and interesting combats with allied troops to help with most of the difficult battles.

Once you get the hang of things you should realistically be able to win any fight with the stats you have. I'd also spread your points into crafting and alchemy rather than exclusively combat skills.