Lord_Mord

Extreme reaction? I'm totally relaxed. I just responded to the things you said. A response by the way, for which I did not get a response back from you. You just focused on the triggered thing, which is, I presume, your whole reason for posting here. But forget it. There is no way to trigger me with that kind of things. I am not a woman, not a feminist nor do I think that I fight for some kind of good cause or any cause at all. I just dont like illogical argumentation. That is unfair. It was no insult. Sedrefilos just analised the things Sakai said and made a justified assumption about his true reasons. Wether or not Sakai likes it plays no role, he brought it all to himself. You wouldn't sue your psychoanalyst for analysing you either.

It was just a matter of time, before you would say that.

As much as I hate that character: That portrait is feminine. If you think otherwise, that's just due to your personal tastes. As it seems that you find the other women in the game to be not feminine enough too, I even think that you have some kind of problem. Those are perfectly normal women. Despite of the fact, that she works in a male domain and is a half-bird, even Pallegina is very feminine. What makes you think otherwise? Short hair or what? Says the guy that claims all women in PoE were boyish. Nobody has something against your wishes and fantasies. But you and others are continuously claiming that the game industry would do certain things just for some kind of secret agenda or something and that big titties in chainmail were normal, whereas every other depiction of women is not. If someone says, that he/she actually likes those characters, your response is to claim, that they were somehow brainwashed. So who are the ones considering themselves enlightened?

Please: Tell me this is sarcasm.

I agree. But who's the elf on the picture?

*sigh* Do you really have no imagination at all, or are you just enjoying the discussion? if( fighter ) { if( mig > 13 && con > 10 ) { kick in door } } else if( wizard ) { if( mig > 13 && con > 10) { kick in door } else if( mig > 13 && int > 10 ) { use magic to destroy door } } P.S.: I know this piece of pseudocode is ****ty. I just wanted to write it down in an understandable way.

You are obviously trying to trigger that kind of reaction, presumingly in an attempt to kill this thread. But you should have noticed by now, that it does not work. So why don't you save your effort and just lie down and die?

Of course the above was meant for wizards only.

Regarding might in scripted interactions: Would it make sense to check two attributes instead of one? So opening a door could work like that: - Minimum Mig plus minimum Con: Bash door - Minimum Mig plus minimum Int: Bash door with magic

Wait... Was there a way to not kill them all?

Is that sarkasm? It's so hard to tell. Besides: I never said that one should only create "likely" characters. I just said that even if all of Ydwins characteristics are "historically accurate" it isn't historically accurate to find them all in one person. And if you would find them, this person would shurely not be a traveling rogue. This is only about your statement of Ydwin being a believable character. So you admit that Ydwin is a stereotypical character? A legitimate collection of gothic and anime cliches? Are you really not getting it, or are you playing dumb? Conan is the most stereotype thing in the fantasy genre that comes to my mind. Saying that he only has those stereotypical barbarian features, because he is a barbarian does not change that. so saying that Ydwin is pale because she is a pale elf means nothing at all. She is a pale elf so she has an excuse to be pale. She could as well be a vampire, witch or whatever. As long as it fits the stereotype. But she can be no dwarf, amaua or anything else that would make her less stereotypical. Not at all. I even would like that. But please, not again in that same way. I cant see that anymore. Yes please. But in my opinion the concept art and description of Ydwin is a bad start for that. People see that image and have a lot of preconceptions (does that word even exist?) in the head immediately. There is no room for any kind of conflict or development besides of "I am the creepy girl and want to be understood". It's like trying to flesh out Sailor Moon or Harry Potter. Of course you can add a lot of inner conflicts and psychological bla bla. But that does not change the fact, that there isn't room for any development besides of "I am superhero with teenager problems" or "I cant really tell who the good guys and bad guys are". Are you trying to say, that the gothic girl stereotype exists only in my head? Are you further implying that if a game developer tries to use that steretype to target a certain group, this is also just happening in my head? Well, of course. In a certain way that is true. But in a certain way that would lead me to the conclusion that none of the following things are really stereotypical. - Conan - 300 - Barbie - Fifty shades of grey - HIM - World of Warcraft - All browser games, that want to be as sucessful as WoW by copying WoW - Porn movies that have the word "stepmother" in their title - Pink unicorns with glitter - Female sidekick superheros with tight, black leatherclothes and a useless weapon or ability - Boygroups - Vampire movies for teenagers, using vampires and/or werewolfs as metaphor for being a teenager. All happening in my head. No one would even think of trying to make money by being stereotypical on purpose. You really think, your behaviour is in any way different? How cute. You don't have to tell me that. It is all hopeless anyway.

As we are doomed anyway, what does it matter?

Yeah, but it would be nice to have at least one companion that fits my taste. Like Durance for exmple. To be honest: All the others were just fillers to me.

1. That every single aspect of a character can be justified from a historical point of view does not necessarily mean that it is very likely to find all these aspects together in one character. We have: Paleness and glasses and forensics and miniskirts and a rapier and the haircut and so on and so on 2. That something is historically correct does not necessarily mean, that it is not a stereotype. Especially from a modern point of view. 3. "She's pale because she's a Pale Elf": Conan the barbarian isn't half naked and very strong because he's a sexist stereotype. He is half naked and very strong because he's a barbarian. 4. "And is someone not allowed to have a backstory that has them being super interested in death/"forensics" of a sort". Of course it's allowed. It is as shallow as a backstory for a softcore porn and we already saw it one million times, but no one said it isn't allowed. 5. None of that is subjective. A stereotype stays a stereotype, even if your subjective taste tries to convince you otherwise. P.S.: These threads don't stop for a reason: People like you, that would defend this stereotypical, crowdpleasing, lazy marketing move called Ydwin to the death, even if they know exactly what people mean, if they say it's anime or gothic or stereotypical. P.P.S.: I like the new portrait of her. Actually I think she might not be that bad as a character. But she is a stereotype and I won't rest until that is perfectly clear to everyone.

I don't think so. Of course she is not painted in anime style, but she still looks like an anime character in my opinion. Like Kabutos long lost sister painted Harry Potter style. If the red haired guy is Rekke, I'm disappointed. I imagined something more ... unusual. I even like Ydwins portrait better, to be honest. The captain women looks interesting, but as I said many times before: I miss the freaks.

That explains a lot. Eder? Really? I couldn't care less on which side his brother fought. Devil was fun, but the conclusion came too quick. Wouldn't have minded to kill some more guys. But what I am talking about isn't wether the quests were fun or the NPCs were nice persons. The only NPC that really seemed to be affected by this rather sick little world was Durance. The only NPC that reflected about that world was Durance. And the only NPC that gives you a glimpse into the mind of the people that started that war, killed that god and had to deal with all they had done is Durance. Of course he's an ass. It's hard to live in such a world and not be an ass.

That is exactly what I am talking about. There is so much room for exploring and almost everything we explored was the personal problems of some normal life people translated into fantasy language. I mean Aloth was fun, but his story didn't even really had to do with animancy. It just served as a trojan horse for troubled teenager stuff. And what was that Sagani-Thing? I guess next time the companion quests will be hunts for cooking recipes. Durance on the other hand at least reflected the world he lived in even if his "quest" was kind of pointless. And guess what: Most people hated him. Why? Because they give a **** about history, philosophy, metaphors about human life, metaphysics or thinking in general. They just want media to be a mirror, reflecting the dull space full of pointless self-centered half-thoughts inside of their skulls.

Wow. You noticed that the nonsense I wrote is nonsense. Gratulations! But how is it politically motivated? I never knew that I was politically motivated. Or even motivated at all. I improvised. Just fill in some other bla bla that makes her a nicer person. Or shall I try again?

Why not a more elaborate thiefing mechanic? Why has everything to be combat only?

Of course.

There was that girl in her cipher class. She was more into philosophy and arts than animancy but she seemed to understand her in a way. They used to go to Mowrgroks Pizza Place after school and talked about lots of things. Like soulmates. Soon Ydwen noticed that something was going on, something more than just friendship. So one day, after they were doing something awesome together that strengthened their bond, she tried to kiss her. But that girl didn't react as expected. She just wanted to be best friends, but that event destroyed everything. So Ydwin once more had alienated a person that was really important in her life. Later the girl died.

I agree, but if all characters can have the mechanics ability and the mechanics ablility enables you to pick locks, disarm traps and probably more stuff in PoE2, then where is the difference in method? In BG your mage could open locks, but he had to use a spell. OK, that was a bit clunky, but it would be an interesting thing to expand upon. What's the point in having a thief if everybody can open locks? What's the point in having a ranger, when everybody can use traps? Yes of course, you can invent something, but in my opinion that would be only to justify those classes. And to be honest: Backstabbing is just playing with bonuses. It does not immediately feel that way, but it is. Basically there is no real difference between backstbbing and lets say Wounding Shot or something. You know that ranger thing with the arrow icon. For me the real distinction begins, when a class is able to use a game mechanic, the others can't.

What about that description (Someone was kind enough to post it in another thread)? Does not sound that much like a "scientist". More of an identification figure for gothic nerd girls. "Noone seems to understand, but death is sooo fascinating." The problem here is not that she fits into one stereotype. The character described and pictured there is a monster sewed together from the countless corpses of different stereotypes. Maybe I can add something to help the writers fleshing out the character: She really likes chocolate, get's very nervous when cute boys are around and has an unhealthy taste for bad guys. As a child she didn't want to play with dolls. Instead she removed their body parts and sewed them together in another order. That alienated the other children, so she hadn't much social contact. Her parents didn't understand her and wanted her to become a lady. Study somthing harmless, find a man and marry him. They brought her to an animancer who should cure her soul, but he didn't find anything unusual. Still her parents were trying to force her. So she ran away oftentimes. Her mother learned to accept how her daughter was, but her father never did, so she had no good relationship with him. Then her father died and she never had the opportunity to get things right with him. Later she found out, that she was bisexual... Shall I continue? I can do this for hours. I would love to tell you the episode where she couldn't save her cat from dying.

OK, you're right. It's not a thief, it's a rogue. I should get used to it. The fewer the limits, the closer we get to a classless system. The limits make the difference between the classless and classbased systems. You know a plumber is for plumbing and so on. I'm beginning to see the real problem here: The system already is closer to classless than D&D. A rogue is not a thief, mechanics is not lockpicking nor is it disarming traps. It could mean anything: Lockpicking, plumbering, repairing motorcycles, building battle robots or megabombs. The generalization makes it more difficult to make the classes distinguishable. Having an animal companion is only there to justify a ranger. Having racial bonuses is only there to justify different races. Having to fight something is only there to justify the game.

I think you didn't get me. I totally understand why it isn't done the way it is done and I'm not thinking that level progress is somehow tied to story progress. I just wanted to say, that I understand (and share) the wish to start at a high level, but that the game is not designed to do so for various reasons. Now the OP wants to start at level 5 eitherway, which I don't understand, because the game just isn't designed for that. My question to the OP was: What would be the point in starting at level 5, even when the game is designed to start at level 1?