Volourn

"there is just no rational need to include something like weight for gold. It does not add any actual challenge or help engage the player." Totally diagree.

No.

Did you really use spoiler tags for a 15 year old game that most posting here have some experience with? L0L Anyways, the point of the diffwerent tiers is to add depth to the game. When they add a new companion they're adding all their dialogue chocies. You don't really need a tier specifically to add more depth the way you suggest since that likely occurs when they implement the quest in the first place.

"When XP and loot become the only motivation, " Who claimed this? I surely didn't.

It should be in the game. If people whine enough, there should be an option to turn it off but friendly fire should be the default. It also shouldn't have nothing to do with 'diffculty level' either.

"You could have used ToEE as a better example of what you are asking for." Nah. DA did it way better. TOEE's was barely adequate and not worth the effort. In DA, you got to actually live the life of the intro not just a 2 min (if lucky) barely there ascene. I just want it to be even deeper than DA's and more added to it.

Bos hybrid wins this thread. GAME OVER.

Why? Thyat's just silly. Why the need to hide things from the player? Numbers are a huge part of rpgs.

There's advantages and disadvantages to both. LARGE NUMBERS: - gives more lee way in the range of xp you can get. this means a dragon cna give you lots of xp compared to an orc - just looks bloated and the higher the numbers needed it just looks silly and meaningless LOW NUMBERS - easier to manage and not bloated - you cna't really give all that much more xp for tough monsters, quest completions, and what not. ie. the dragon and orc in the above exmaple would not reward you all that much difference in actual xp. ... also for non combat xp picking a tough lock won't net you significantly more than an easy lock. In conclusion, pick a reason number system that works for the game system and stick with it. DnD has used both type of systems and they both work fine,.

So you want to lower the motivation to explore the world? Gaining xp and ph@t lewt are two reasons to do side quests along with your suggestions of party interaction, effecting other quests and whatnot). This stuff has been sued for ages and still works. Why fix something not broken? Why do people feel that everyonme should be EXACTLY the same level at the EXACT time in the main plot? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of a non linear game? Afterall, if you have a mage PC and a warrior PC in BG2 you would get access to different quests, and loot on certain side quests. And, i don't the xp was perfectly even between the two. Also, getting xp and loot for side quests is also a good way to reward the player for exploring 'off the beaten path' which is another aspect of this type of RPG. But, hey, let's all be level 10 warriors with great sword +2 at end of game so its equally balanced for everybody. That'sm silly talk since party makeup will likely be different for everyone, and skills will be different for eveyone. Heck, even two fighters who have different weapons may actually have different experiences with the same fight against the same creature. Afterall, a fire based sword is gonna suck against fire creatures but a a fighter weilding an ice based sword will have a much easier time versus the same foe. IMAGINE THAT. Let's reward exploring the game world, and encountering different foes, and using different abilties. That's the way it should be.

IDing through items/scrolls/scores like lore/ enchanters are a cool must of the genre. Cursed items should also be brought back too - not enough games make use of them. Some people above call these 'timewasters' or 'ruiners of fun' but I believe they add to the game play, the funness of discovery, and making us curiosor and curisoer. Afterall, a magic item that you can't id by simply picking up will make you be very interested in what it does making you salivate and be excited when you finally get the chance to know what it is. Stuff like swords+1 is stuff a basic lore skill could allow the party loremaster know without going tom use a spell/item/or knowledgable npc. I also love the idea of for 'legendary items' to have potential secret powers you can only discover through use or through other side quests to 'unlock' powers. LONG LIVE MAKING DISCOVERING MAGIC ITEMS AS PART OF THE GAME PLAY EXPERIENCE!!!

wut? i swear i beat bg1 when i killed sarevok and i swear i beat pst when the final confrontation was over. R00fles!

"ts so sad to see people considering rpgs by the stats and how these stats work. rpgs are much more that numbers in a character sheet" Stats and character sheets is what makes RPGs RPGs. Otherwise you just have adventure games.

"if you got loads of xp awards for combat, but less opportunities for other activities" The one being ridiculous is the one pretending that i claimed I wanted such a situation. Nowhere did I ask to receive xp only or mostly from combat. Don't be silly.

You do realize that the plan is for the game to be non linear with plenty of side quests so people are already going tom have varying xp/level anyways depending what quests they accomplish even if they did it your way, right? Your logic sucks. This isn't some linear adventure ala IWD so they are already going to have characters of different power levels when it coems to facing the 'end game'. Therefore, in conclusion, you admit to preferring a ttotally linear game. That's cool. P.S. I'm not here to make the devs' job 'easier'; I'm here hoping to get the game I'd most enjoy for my $. Besdies, I believe Obsidian is gifted and talented enough to handle these challenges. I guess I have a lot more faith in their abilities than you do. If you hate them so much and think they are too sucky to handle developing RPGs why are you interested in their game?

"different tack. for those who object to quest xp rewards, offer us a similarly simple and intuitive system that will result in players getting equal xp regardless o' their play style. sure, "balance" is often ridiculed in these parts, but shouldn't the sneaky player or the diplomat get as much xp awarded to them as does the combat player? get halfway through game and the sneakers has 1/2 as much xp as the combat players would be bad, no? quest rewards ignores complexity o' trying to balance rewards for disparate activities. now some folks like vol needs a digital pat on the noggin for every action they is successfully completing, but is that really an efficient use of developer time and effort? quest xp is inherently balanced and simple to implement... which means developers can spend time actual developing game content 'stead of trying to achieve balanced xp awards in an action-based system. tell us your alternative. give us a simple way to implement. " Thankfully, I don't believe in equality so that is an absolute non issue. Just like I laugh at peons who beleive that rogues should be the equal of a mage. LAUGHABLE!

We always do and I cna't wait. My victories for hard earned battles so far: - Dwarves! - xp for both combat and non combat

Yes, it's settled. Another win for the goods ie. me. You get xp for both combat *and* non combat. GAME OVER.

I'm looking forward to LOTS of variant spells from the usual espciially non combat spells. I like the talk of teleportation and hope it is included in some way in the spell. Of coruse, the usual suspects like fireball should be included but some less common ones would be sweet. I hope there is a major quest involving dwarves because dwarves rock!! And, I hope the different subraces of each race are coolio.

"vast majority of folks who complain about the decision would never have known the difference." Proof please. This is a RPG. XP gain is expected in one way or another. If it wasn't shown being gained people are darn well gonna wonder wth is up. L0L

It worked horrible. It made combat useless. I remember I just didn't care about doing anything except running down the hallway to get to the end and not 'experiencing' anything. You should be rewarded for all experiences not just 'quest compeltion' but combat and non combat stuff. Crafting a magical item should be ewarded, defeating a giant (not enccessarily as aprt of a quest), or persudading a baretnder to give you a discount should all be rewarded with xp even if theya ren't officially a part of a lame quest. Xp for actual activities (random, or non quest related) is a good way to reward the player for exploration and thinking out of the box. Question only xp leads the player into linear thinking and gives one absolutely no freedom. Why fight when you get nothing out of it? Why talk when you get nothing out of it? Why explore when you get nothing out of it? XP, equiipment, and 'the experience' are all 3 aspects that players should be rewarded iby in all aspects of the game. Quest xp is about boxing the player in. It's almost as bad as games that *only* award xp for fighting. Both ways are evil, immoral, and sickening and spit in the face of REAL role-playing.

And, I hope that is what they mean. XP by quest completion only is good in theory but has never worked to satisfaction in practice. As above, BL and ME2 are evidence of this. Of course, xp by combat ONLY is also a bad idea.

FF did them first and did them better.

Has Obsidian stated that xp is quest only? It didn't work out well in either V:BL or ME2, imo.

No.