Looks like POE has launched a turned based option!

TBH I was a bit disappointed to see this game was going to be RTwP. Having turn based combat, true to the PnP game, as an option would get me back into it. Lets do this Owlcat games!

I certainly would never play in turn based mode and would rather they spend their time adding more classes, companions, races and story content. In a way you can play in turn based mode already, by having the game auto-pause each turn. I know it’s not the same, but it’s an option.

I agree.

Strongly disagree, it’s nothing like turn based.
I vastly prefer RTwP and hope they don’t add turn based mode, even if it’s optional. That would mean missed opportunity to add to the story, to squish the bugs, to add new meaningful content.

Go play other games if you like turn based combat. It’s your mistake for buying this game if you so love the turn based system, next time you should be more smarter.

I’m with DrHappyAngry. For Owlcat to turn Kingmaker as TB compatible, they’d have to adjust most of the encounters (otherwise TB combat will be drag due to too many “trashmobs”) - also, Owlcat made it very clear why they went with RTwP during the kickstarter phase.


I am always disappointed when a game is announced as being TB, and given that most current games in this genre are TB I have zero sympathy for the OP’s POV. I think TB game developers should be the ones pressured to add a RTwP option!

The turn-based mode is being added to PoE2 because of the dedicated work of a few members of Obsidian’s team over several months, and it’s still in a Beta mode while they fix bugs, balance abilities, and redesign encounters that become too tedious or hard to manage in the new mode. Given how much the Owlcats team is still working on its other DLC and still squashing bugs, I wouldn’t expect them to be devoting time and team members to a big overhaul like redesigning the basics of the main gameplay.

On top of that, PoE has more freedom with its turn-based mode to design it to whatever they think works best for its gameplay. If PF:KM tries to implement a turn-based mode, they’ll need to go back on all of the design decisions they made that work better with RTWP to try to perfectly match the way that Pathfinder works at the table. So much of the game - missing abilities, changed abilities, the way terrain and maps are built, the stats of enemies, the pacing, the number of enemies and combats, etc. - is built with the intention of playing in a RTWP system. Adding a turn-based mode would be a ton of work and while I appreciate that Obsidian added it for their game, I think that adding it to PF:KM would run into bigger problems because it would have very little freedom in what it would look like and so many decisions in the game would probably not work as well in turn-based mode.

DOS (Divinity Original Sin) 1&2 is turn-based, if it helps you to ‘‘get you back into it’’. plus, you can play coop (DOS1 is 2player coop and DOS2 is 4 players coop).

They advertised PF:KM as a rebirth of the baldur’s gate genre, and it never featured TB (as far as my knowledge go, given I’ve completed most games of the genre). it has always been RTwP, so they’re not entitled to add a TB option.

It’s funny that some players are dead set on playing a turn based game, when RTwP was considered a major improvement when it was first introduced in games (I’m thinking about the UFO/X-COM serie, for instance).

I voted “No”, because:

  1. It would really slow down trash encounters,
  2. It would require alot of work and isn’t worth the effort. For instance, how would “Touch of Good” (which lasts 1 round and is used out of combat most of the time) be handled ?

In addition, a turn based combat system has its charms, but so has RTwP. We have RTwP in this game, and that’s fine.

the end turn pause option is largely enough if you want a turn by turn feature

Not really, as designating your next actions at end of your turn but before you know outcome of other characters’ intervening turns is extremely divergent from D&D/Pathfinder Turn based play, unless you want to roleplay a drunk/brain-damaged character with extremely slow decision making/reaction time, and even such characters would have alot better reactivity/situational awareness than End of Turn Pause action designation. Never mind how continual movement impacts AoE spell targetting, where restricting oneself to AoE designation at End of Turn would be formula for missing alot of enemies and/or hitting alot of allies. (And spell targetting is just most obvious example). Of course, the enemies/NPCs would not be so restricted, because Pause options don’t affect AI operation.

Really, the choice re: when characters can 1st begin to move (in encounter) is not dictated by RTwP approach, and I could see different dynamic of that which could be viably implemented via a Mod (i.e. “pausing” a character and not allowing any movement nor other actions (even ‘free actions like Rage’) until Init/Turn comes up, more closely hewing to tabletop unlike current version, while still operating within RTwP paradigm… just more tightly controlling how Init determines when chars start reacting to combat re: movement and free actions). Not that I think the OP would be particularly excited about that, despite it being closer to pen & paper dynamic.

But I agree there was never any reasonable expectation for Kingmaker to provide D&D Turn system, and even if I don’t think Turns are unredeemably bad in CRPG, I don’t think it is effective usage of Owlcat’s limited dev resources to focus on upending core gameplay system. Consider that many of the players who DO like RTwP still find the game lacking and wanting further depth WHILE being 100% happy with the RTwP mechanic, so even if you got this wish of yours, that would only mean you and Turn-based fans would simply be in the same boat that RTwP fans now are in, happy with base mechanic but finding broader aspects of the game limiting and so on. It’s just not a constructive direction to put dev resources. And to be clear, the same would apply if it were Turn-based from the start, and some people “wanted” RTwP.

TB is really good with POE2. I love it.So good that if the vote for best rpg 2018 come today i will vote for it right now. (i vote for Pathfinder)
Now, POE2 look like my ADD tabletop when i was 20 and it’s great.
But the best move from Obsidian is clearly to offer both : you can choose between TB or RTwP ! You can choose, and choosing is great ! It’s the only CRPG i know where you can choose your way to play it. Every CRPG should be that way.

I’m 70 hours in my TB run, it’s the same pace as my last 96h full run.I run a veteran party with Obsidian NPC. It’s not min/max
I wipe my party a lot less because i micro more and win every fight within more or less 2 rounds for trash. For me, i think it speed trash encounter. Large encounters are slower but easier.

IMHO a game using the Pathfinder RPG system should be turn-based BUT I also understand why Owlcat decided to go with the “traditional” RTwP system. Most Kingmaker players have not been blessed with the opportunity to play the Pathfinder tabletop RPG (and some have not played any tabletop RPG at all) and having as broad a playerbase as possible is key for a computer game.

Yeah, this whole “it’s a tabletop system therefore the computer version MUST be TB” doesn’t fly with me. Having to take turns in a pnp/tabletop game is a LIMITATION of those games out of necessity because there is nothing else you can do when having a group of human players seated around a table and playing ANY game. The whole point of taking such games to the computer medium is to be able to use the technology of computers to overcome the limitations of pnp gaming. It is downright silly to continue to keep this limitation, this flaw, this horrible thing called “taking turns” when you no longer HAVE to do so.

While I understand thi very well, I would like to point out that the Pathfinder (and the D20 system that came before it, obviously) was made for pnp. Everything from it is thought out for a turn-based system. Porting the system to a RTwP system on computer means a change in balance in the structure of the game. Many things have to be reconsidered in view of the new balance and system.

Personally, I like both, I like the Pathfinder feel in this game, but to me, it is clearly different from pnp that I like too. I must admit, however, that a turn-based video game often feels boring to me. :stuck_out_tongue: Combats last too long for my taste. :stuck_out_tongue:

While I personally favour TB combat, an option to turn it on and off will be the perfect compromise for me. For instance, I will keep it RTwP during most of the “red-shirt” econcounters in order to make them quicker and use TB combat during big, boss-like fights where every action is important.

you know what makes me think of such a system? Fallout tactics. you could go from TB to RT at the single click of a button. However, you could easily abuse such a system. Since fallout is post-apo themed, it’s mostly ranged weapons and deathclaws (monstrous CAC specialist), so I would often go to TB, use all the AP to move my deathclaws towards the ennemy without them being able to fire at them, and once all points were spent, I would click to RT system to be able to keep moving while the ennemies were finally taking their turns.

Anyways, such an abuse is easily solvable by blocking the possibility to turn from TB to RT during the same fight. It just made me think of that when you mentionned that possibility.

I can see your point, but since Pathfinder’s rules are specifically designed for a TB combat I don’t think that’s the case.

109 hours with TB for POE2 instead of 96 in RTwP.
But it totally change my vision of the game. It’s now very difficult for me to replay it without TB. I try but it get on my neves in 5 minutes when npc does’t do exactly what i want where i want …
For me, TB in POE2 is a total blast ! Ready to pay for it with another kickstarter or for a new pathfinder story.

The situation with PoE2 is unique. Because the game was built as a RTwP game, and the devs have stated they will not change any of the mechanics on the RTwP side to satisfy the TB side, meaning separate mechanics for the two modes as and where necessary, it is acceptable to me as a RTwP person who hates TB combat. However, if a game were made from the start having both modes, then at least for some mechanics the devs would have to make a choice: either have separate mechanics for each mode, or optimize those mechanics favoring one or the other of the modes. And if the choice is the latter, and if even one mechanic is done favoring optimization for TB over RTwP, I would be seriously pissed.

To put it more simply, either the game will have to be developed with separate mechanics for each mode and all of the extra cost this would involve, or risk angering/alienating one or both sides of the RTwP/TB divide on account of mechanics optimization choices made in the game. So I don’t see having both options becoming a thing in games generally in the future.

I see Obsidian’s addition of TB mode into PoE2 as merely an experiment they’re running to test out TB mechanics for a future (non PoE) game.

Bump for more support! Let’s get that TB mode