Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


1 Neutral

About GrandMasterJR

  • Rank
    (1) Prestidigitator
    (1) Prestidigitator


  • Pillars of Eternity Backer Badge
  • Pillars of Eternity Kickstarter Badge
  1. I can understand why you would want to grant experience for completing objectives only... but in the same way that there are flaws to granting experience for killing npcs/etc, I believe there are flaws in not granting experience for killing them. I don't have to kill those evil monsters who are terrorizing this forrest because I don't have a quest to do so. So why should I care? I guess that "flaw" can be mitigated through solid game design though. Either way I guess.
  2. I'm kind of torn on this because I want both! I want a large variety of weapons and I want them all the behave differently ha ha. However I understand that from a developement point of view that would be a nightmare on many fronts. I guess the compromise is to have a subsets of weapons. For example, bladed weapons, axes, maces, spears... but I also like single handed, duel wielding, and two handed varieties. I like it when weapons have different damage types and everything... slashing, piercing and crushing, etc, plus different weapon types having different advantages. Axes / Swords could potentially leave wounds with bleeding damage, crushing attacks with maces or hammers could leave a target disoreintated, knock them down, or drain stamina.
  3. I'm not really sure I like the idea of a heavily armored warriors vitality being penaltized against a lighter more agile foe. I imagine hit points or vitality as being a measure of toughness. A 250 lb warrior in heavy armor is going to be able to take a lot more punishment than a 150 lb lightly armored agile foe. The warrior I would expect to get hit often, but take much less damage. The agile character should have a much higher % chance of dodging or evading attacks completely... but if he does get hit would take more damage than his warrior counterpart. That's why I like the idea of heavy armor reducing the damage taken, and having dodge, block, parry type stats as well.
  4. I really liked AP a lot too! I played it through and I remember thinking that I wished the ending had been flushed out just a little bit more, but overall I had a blast. Afterwards I read the reviews and I wasn't sure that everyone who complained about the game, actually played the same game! Sometimes I think people just like to cry.
  5. I've always liked "Armor class" systems that actually make sense logically (at least to me, ha ha). For example, I like that if you're wearing plate armor and you get hit, you take less damage because that armor would absorb the damage (possibly negating it completely). Likewise it makes sense to me that dodging an attack would obviously confer no damage. Blocking an attack with a shield may remove a portion of the damage, or something. I'm not really a fan of the you missed, or you hit and that's it, system.
  • Create New...