A "d20 System" turn based rpg... is asking too much?

[alessio72]

Hello everyone, and sorry for bad english and the following outburst. ;)

I'm a long time tabletop RPG player, and I think there is no worse way to distort a table top role-playing game, which by nature uses a turn-based combat system, making it real-time.

Real time combat could be good for Action RPGs with just one character to control, but in a party based game, it makes everything extremely confusing, chaotic and frustrating.

I hate BG with all myself so much for introducing this terrible "tactical pause" system, IMHO the worst plague ever hit role-playing games.

I was so happy when I heard that a Pathfinder-based game was in development, how desperate when I learned that it would use this terrible combat system.


I still regret "Temple Of Elemental Evil", maybe a game afflicted by too many bugs, but the only one that really recreated the experience of playing AD&D on PC.

Regarding Pathfinder: Kingmaker, I read everywhere that is a game for purists, and hardly usable by a casual player.
What is the reason to use the realtime combat system, which should only serve to bring those people who have never played a table top GDR in their life?

When I had lost hope, fortunately some developer is back to developing great turn-based games, but how long will I have to wait to see one based on AD&D or Pathfinder?

[RJM]

Nobody knows.

Owlcat must have had the choice in early prototyping to go turn based or RTwP. For their own reasons they have chosen RTwP. Perhaps because they thought it more marketable to hark back to the classic Baldur's Gate than the dim and distant days of D&D Gold Box games. More modern turn based games like ToEE (2003) and Pools of Radiance (2001) were not met with commercial success. Perhaps also because in a turn based game these adventure paths would be just too huge. It already takes very impressive numbers of hours to finish. Double the play time and it could be just too much. It's not perfect but I'll happily play it as a pretty solid Pathfinder game.

WotC are clearly willing to make the D&D licence available for gaming products because we've had several in recent years, but none directly trying to give the D&D experience since the Neverwinter MMO and D&D Online and even those are very different beasts than the classic turn based party game. Virtually none of the D&D games have been turn based because they just don't think it has the same size of commercial market as a real time game. They're probably right.

[Kyutaru]

Mmm, if you want another similar to ToEE, play Pools of Radiance.

The real time combat means you don't have to program turn logic. The realtime mode is just a shooter using different sorts of projectiles. Nothing that would require turn-based gameplay is included, everything is hacked together using the illusion of that. Your swords swing at a certain radius around the character, you auto attack things that get too far from that circle, you can entirely miss with your fireball because someone moved before the explosion occurred, everything is built like a standard action game which Unity by default is good at accomodating.

Why are there so few turn-based games? Because there are so few turn-based engines. None of which are free.

[Tanlaus]

I tend to agree with RJM. The two turn based games that have been released did not do all that well. This probably scares developers away from making more.

You’ve got to imagine that even the people visiting this board are, for the most part, a self selecting group of CRPG players who know more about this type of game than the average player. And even here I’d bet the enthusiasm for this being turn based might be lukewarm at best.

I personally enjoyed TOEE, especially with the circle of eight fixes... but some of the bigger fights could get tedious because of how long they took.

I suspect it’s just not that market friendly in the long run.

[Arthur Revan]

Well, I'm no purist but also no casual.
And I say the "tactical pause" is the best.

But it needs good realization. Dragon Age Origins and Tyranny for example (at least for me).

Hear in PFKM it a bit clanky, abilities in Tyranny were much better, and d20 rolls are pissing me off!

So I play on meddle between "Normal" and "Easy" difficulty, this way some battles are real time, but if the enemy tuff then pause, pause, pause. (basically turn-based).

SO IMHO: "Tactical pause" is the best.

[alessio72]

Divinity OS 1/2 and Wasteland 2 was excellent modern turn based RPG, XCOM remakes was excellent turn based strategy game, even good old turn based JRPG are back with Dragon Quest VI, and a lot of nice turn based indie games were developed (Banner Saga, Invisivle Inc, Darkest Dungeon, Shadowrun, Battle Chasers, etc.)

is it so difficult or unprofitable to develop one based on solid rules and lore like AD&D or Pathfinder?
And would it really be so difficult to offer both modes option, real time or turn based (as in the old Fallout 1&2), to please everyone?

[Kyutaru]

Originally posted by alessio72:

Divinity OS 1/2 and Wasteland 2 was excellent modern turn based RPG, XCOM remakes was excellent turn based strategy game, even good old turn based JRPG are back with Dragon Quest VI, and a lot of nice turn based indie games were developed (Banner Saga, Invisivle Inc, Darkest Dungeon, Shadowrun, Battle Chasers, etc.)

is it so difficult or unprofitable to develop one based on solid rules and lore like AD&D or Pathfinder?

Those games are incredibly simplistic compared to Dungeons and Dragons combat. Three of them merely involve choosing which target you want your gun to shoot at.

Oh, and lots of AD&D games were made. See the TSR Gold Box collection. The studio that made them went under so they were apparently not all that popular.

[Arthur Revan]

@alessio72
The answer is "appeal to a larger demographic".

I for example never heard of Pathfinder. ( despite the title "The best table RPG" )
But searching for Tyranny and PoE 2 news... Well, here I am.

[dulany67]

When BG was made turn based play was seriously out of favor. It was shouted by the game mags that turn based was dead and could not be profitable. Now part of that is that RPG's were in a down faze- even though we remember it as a time when classics were made.

Apparently, owlcat wanted to market off the good feeling the public has for infinity engine games. Perhaps it would have been different if they knew how well DoS:2 would sell.

[alessio72]

Originally posted by Kyutaru:

Those games are incredibly simplistic compared to Dungeons and Dragons combat. Three of them merely involve choosing which target you want your gun to shoot at.

Oh, and lots of AD&D games were made. See the TSR Gold Box collection. The studio that made them went under so they were apparently not all that popular.

Precisely for this reason I think it is extremely complicated and frustrating for the player, having to manage a party in real time with the AD&D CS, with the characters who go anywhere except where you want, charging the enemy on which the wizard is casting a fireball, or the wizard who go melee with a troll!

I was forced to give up all the games party based/real time games I tried, from BG to POE, because of the anger that they cause to me.

[Riftwalker]

too be honestl, my favorite XCOM game was Apocolypse which is real time...

but yeah, i would have liked if they made an option to pause every 6 seconds or everytime a character's turn ends pause and swap over to him.

[Wolfshart79]

To be honest I am a huge fan of turn based games and I was sceptical of them using realtime...fortunately they have added a robust pause system that essentially makes it turn based depending on the options you choose. I see this as a win win since it allows us that like turn based and those that want realtime to have the options avaiable to tailor it to our preferences. If you find the realtime too much than look into the options menu and you should be able to crank up the pause options how ever you want. The structure of the game is still based on a turn system, with cast times and specific action economy. I wish more games did this rather than sticking to a strict turn based or realtime design...good job Owlcat.

[AzureTheGamerKobold]

you can't say turnbased would turn people away because one of the MOST popular CRPG's is Divinity Original Sin and it's Turn based and still one of the BEST combat systems ever done... so no it's not that turn based is bad in fact its very good. It's just they are trying to capture the nastalgia ofr Baldur's gate 1 and 2 that's the reason the system works the way it does. So people who played that game go OOO i loved BG 1 and 2! i'll play this!

Turnbased would and will always be better for D&D

[Shahadem]

Originally posted by AzureTheGamerKobold:

you can't say turnbased would turn people away because one of the MOST popular CRPG's is Divinity Original Sin and it's Turn based and still one of the BEST combat systems ever done.

That's one person's opinion anyways.

I got 2 hours into it and I was done.

[Samwise Gamgy]

Because it is fun? Because variety is the spice of life? Because that is what they like? Because a lot of people myself included still play Baldur's Gate 2? Because Dragon Age: Origins is awesome?

Look DOS2 is awesome, PoE 1&2 are awesome, Tyranny is fairly good (great at first), TOEE is great at combat (and terrible at being an RPG).

I love Pathfinder as a table top RPG. I love all of the D20 systems variants from D&D 3.0 to Iron Heroes, Lone Wolf, Conan D20, D20 Modern, Arcana Evolved, etc. Pathfinder Kingmaker is a very good representation of what the combat is like IMO and i love it for that.

But then again, I also love FF12, FFtactics, and FF8 :) All different, all good.

[Owl]

Divinity ii, still best RPG on the market.