Jediphile

Because besides fixed and restrictive classes and feats, D&D/d20 also bases a lot of the core functions on things like experience points. Now, accumulating xp isn't a bad idea per se, since at it's core it's a fine representation of progress. But in D&D xp is based on monster slashing - the more monsters you kill, the more xp you get. And it doesn't stop there, no. Every single creature or person is worth xp, so going by the rules, you'd get xp for every single little orc, peasant, ferret, or slug you kill. Sure, you and I can agree that is a preposterous basis for character growth, but it's still right there in the core rules. I much prefer systems where the GM awards xp based on actual role-playing, and where those xp are then used to buy abilities and skills to represent progress rather than to cross some arbitrary xp level. GURPS and WoD does the former. D&D/d20 does the latter, which tends to reward stupid xp abuse over good roleplaying. No, I don't do it either in my AD&D campaign, but it's actually what the rules say. Yes, I'd agree that in that case d20 rules are convenient and appropriate. It's easy to work with and requires players to make few and easy choices during play. There is nothing wrong with enjoying dungeon crawls, and D&D/d20 is appropriate for it, but it still has no depth. I've also enjoyed playing Diablo II on my computer, but I'm not pretending it's a role-playing game, when it's really just a polished hack 'n slash/dungeon crawl game with extremely linear story and no plot options, unlike KotOR, for example. Star Wars movies are fun, but they have no depth next to movies like Blade Runner or Apocalypse Now. They're fun to watch, but once you leave the theatre, that's pretty much it. Same thing with d20 - it may be fun, but the characters has no depth beyond numbers on a sheet of paper. At least none that is supported or encouraged by the core rules. Now, that's not to say that D&D characters cannot be complex or memorable. Indeed, my fondest ever character was a cryptic and secretive D&D wizard, but that was due to my role-playing - he became memorable for me in spite of D&D rules, certainly not because of them. For example, he had an allergy toward horses and was afraid of spiders. That's fun, but D&D rules won't let me represent that in the game (well, 2e player option rules did, not 3e...). Sure, I can still establish it for my character, but it has no consequence in 3e rules. That means such characteristics will be completely voluntary limitations that a player chooses with no redeeming counterbalance in 3e, which tends to discourage players from being creative when giving PCs characteristics. After all, the GM should penalize me if I don't roleplay my disadvantage, so if taking it carries no counterbalance, then I'm unlikely to choose as a player, aren't I? Otherwise a player would just be shooting himself in the foot, which is not a popular pastime...

So if the rules are flawed and restrictive, I should rectify them by redesigning them myself? Well, why bother investing money in the game, if that's not the game I'll be playing anyway? I've heard this argument before from people who seem to like d20. Okay, fine. I'm not going to diss you or anyone else just for liking a system I find to be flawed. To each his own. If I explain my position, I will therefore say things that you don't like reading. So feel free to not read on. The thing is that it still sounds to me like people who like d20 are being apologists for it because they don't like admitting that the system is restrictive. Levels and classes are fine for hack 'n slash or dungeon crawls, and if that's your game then fine - good for you. I, however, don't enjoy it and I find it restrictive to have fixed archetypes forced upon me as a role-player. For 3e I was looking forward to throwing out all my AD&D 2e player option-based house rules, but merely a casual look told me it would be easier to write a completely new system myself. You really need to check out a few other RPGs if you think d20 is flexible and customiseable. Heck, even AD&D 2e was less restrictive - it at least had lists for breaking down the classes in the DMG, which is something strangely missing from the 3e DMG. Yes, that seems to be both TSR's and now WotC's solution to all problems - get the players to buy more books... And failing that, they do a quick revision, forcing people to replace their books as they did with 3.5... Not even TSR ever did that. I'm sure it's financially sound strategy according to the suits, but I'm not going to support it with my money, since it suggests the system was deliberately flawed from the beginning. Good for you and your players. However, I don't think so, and nor did my players. D20 is selling because it holds brand names like D&D or Star Wars or Call of Cthulhu, certainly not because it's better than the alternatives. 5th edition Call of Cthulhu was infinitely better than the d20 rubbish they've released now. I mean, they've applied experience levels to Cthulhu, for crying out loud! WotC should give players conversion options for systems like GURPS or similar and see what their players really prefer... However, they will never do that. Indeed, WotC - by their own admission - intend to all other alternatives to disappear. They don't say it's to monopolize the market, but then they wouldn't... But feel free to disagree with me. Just tell me you've at least tried playing 5th edition Cthulhu or GURPS or World of Darkness or any other system first. If d20 is all you've ever tried, then you have no basis of comparison. Players trying and experiencing alternate rules is WotC's worst nightmare...

LOL My apologies.

Disagree -its much better to simply tell them that CoC is a whole other ballpark. To start like that might kick them off in the completely wrong direction with them carrying Maxim guns and dynamite at all time. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Except that's what your run-of-the-mill D&D player does already. My point was to scare them enough to realize that all their hardware and testosterone won't matter, since they'll die if they try to meet violence with violence... every time! Disagree. Its about horror & mystery and the focus is on investigation and discovery, not necessarily about fighting whatever it is the players discover(attempting it usually gets players killed) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You obviously haven't played classics like "Walker in the Wastes" or "The Masks of Nyarlathotep"... I swear there were times when we were lucky if we lost only one character per gaming session while playing the former "

Well, I've tried both, but it's a real dilemma, and I'll tell you way. First of all, I completely agree with you about the annoying restrictiveness of RPGs using inflexible class systems and so. I could accept it in AD&D because it was an old system, but D&D 3e/d20 was released only a few years back, was a complete rewrite of the basic D&D core rather than an expansion of that core as OD&D, AD&D 1st and AD&D 2nd editions were. D20 is a workable system, but to release a game forcing strict and inflexible class-systems today is preposterous. I genuinely feel that it's release has set development of RPGs back a decade or more, since it's a return to a system base now more than thirty years old. And that age shows... A lot! Like you say, it's simply not good enough that I cannot build the character I want to because the rules are too inflexible to allow it. However, the counter-argument will undoubtedly be that rules serve to maintain game balance. This is true, and it's a reason why I don't like freeform play so much. I've tried a few online freeform RPGs (PBeM), and characters in those games tend to be uber-characters with powers and abilities that are just silly and munchkin. Yes, I want freedom to build my character, but freedom doesn't mean "whatever you please" - there still needs to be some limits somewhere. Truly nature players can handle freeform, but few players are truly adult players... even if they are adults " Far too many fail to resist the temptation of the dark side and instead fall to the temptation to abuse the freedom given to them That dilemma is there and it's no good claiming it isn't. But as I said, I also do not want restrictive rules telling me that I can't do certain things because it was not taken into consideration. If the rules tell me that I must make this or that sacrifice to get the power/ability/whatever that I want as a defining trait for my character, then that's fine. But rules telling me that I just can't do it because the writers couldn't be bothered to include the option I want are obsolete and should be thrown out the window! D&D/d20 is a major villain here, because it forces all sorts of options on you. Why does my D&D rogue get the Sneak Attack feats *forced* on him? After all, I just wanted him because I liked the idea of a sly merchant with lots of skill options who could handle a sword? I did not intend him to be an assassin, so why is that archetype forced on me? Or why can't my wizard be just as good at the innuendo skill as a rogue? He is likely to be just as intelligent if not more, so why can't he make subtle threats and so when he talks? There are no good answers to such questions, nor should there be - the rules should be open enough to allow us options enough, but in many games they simply don't. Thirty or even twenty years ago, this was okay, because RPGs were still in their infancy. D&D has been standing still, however, while most other RPGs have moved forward. Actually, D&D has moved backwards, since the AD&D player option rules (which I use in my AD&D campaign) actually allow far more freedom to mix it up than the d20 version does... This means that D&D today is an antiquated and hopelessly outdated system. But there are games out there that allow far more freedom. It's just a question of finding one where the authors have bothered to design the game enough to allow for possibilities. A class based system is by definition restrictive. I can accept it only if it exists for a reason tied directly to the campaign world (as in White Wolf's games, such as Vampire or Exalted). Sadly, tabletop RPG is today fast becoming synonymous with d20 as the system sweeps the market in a Microsoft-esque attempt to establish the core as a monopoly in the industry. Those of us who don't like restrictive RPGs or who don't want companies to corner or monopolize the market need to stop supporting their games and marketing stategies. There are still alternatives out there. I've been looking into the new edition of GURPS lately, and it looks very polished and open. I'm not going to say it's perfect, but it's certainly a much better and catering system than d20 ever will be, and those areas where I disagree are so tiny that I can fix it with house rules if need be. If I'd begin a new RPG campaign today, I'd definitely use GURPS rules. Well, I guess I'll stop my long boring rant now ...

It's just the way of the Sith - if the apprentice can defeat the master, then the master is no longer worthy and is thrown from power (which usually means killed). It ensures that the Sith are always ruled by the strongest, as evil Bastila put it in KotOR1. Of course, it was rather ironic that Kreia, the great betrayer, was herself betrayed when her apprentices ganged up on her... That's not so much the Sith way, and it began the power struggle that probably gave the game its name.

Shh, you're revealing my secret plan... Oh, and it's not a regenerating mask, really. You remember who ended up with the mask... "

Right now the soundtrack from Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl by Klaus Badelt and Hans Zimmer is playing in the background.

I'm guessing .. Chaotic Evil .. " <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, Game Master - much worse... according to my players

That's pretty much along the lines of what I expected too, yes. I should have mentioned this before, but if anyone's interested, the soundfiles I refer to are in the streamvoice/262/SISEND/ folder, files 262SISEND010 to 262SISEND012. There is a possibility to restore it?!? Wow!! That's a very pleasant surprise to me. Don't get me wrong, I don't expect you to, but that it's even being considering it is big news to me. Thank you! After all, it's probably not a sequence many will care about, though I'd obviously like it bad. I thought the sisters got a raw deal - they may have been rather aloof and arrogant, but they were mislead rather than evil, so watching them all be killed off was a bit sad... All that being said, though, I think you guys have been on the right track so far - all the things you've mentioned in your progress reports are admittedly more significant and important to restore than this.

About the repair/computer thing - you have to repair him first before the option to use computer skill on him becomes available. You can use each of these skills on him three times in total IIRC. After that you can do a combined computer/repair option, but which actually boosts the Exile's stats instead of T3's (it's an increase to Wisdom and force points, I think). My character had 16 natural intelligence when getting the intelligence options to question T3 about his past, so I know that works for a fact. Less might do it too, though. Well, it was Revan and it wasn't... The Bastila recording (ugly, ugly holovid, but I digress...) was clearly made before Revan left, because Bastila reveals that she has seen a few glimpses of the future and learned some things against Revan's will from their shared link. There are light and dark side variations of this, but that much is true in both cases, as is the fact that she tells T3 to aid Revan, since Revan will not take Bastila along (to protect her if Revan is light side and because their link can be a threat or distraction to Revan if dark side). And whether light or dark, Bastila also tells T3 to return to the republic and find Bastila if something happens to Revan. Failing that, T3 is to find any other sort of help (evil Bastila doesn't care whether this aid is jedi or sith), so since the Exile is rumored to be the only jedi left at the beginning of the game, that's who T3 is going for. If you want to hear those sound files, they are all located in the /streamvoice/gbl/T3M4/ library. The gblt3m4098 to gblt3m4104 are the light side Bastila comments, and gblt3m4105 to gblt3m4110 are dark side Bastila's. After that are the alternate Carth comments. What's more confusing is where exactly Kreia fits into it all, but Kreia tells us that Revan came to her. This was likely after she was cast out by Sion and Nihilus, and knowing what he was about to do, she probably came with him to the unknown regions, then went back with T3 aboard the Ebon Hawk. Needless to say, HK-47 was probably along for the ride as well, but was damaged in the Sith attack (and he knows nothing since neither Bastila nor Carth would trust him as much as T3... Nor would Revan, come to think of it...) What's really confusing are the other bodies and droid remains we find on the Ebon Hawk during the prologue, because we never hear anything about who those people were. I sure hope it wasn't the former crew of the Ebon Hawk I generally like the subtle plot of KotOR2, but where they really dropped the ball was in introducing us to the game. I mean, you begin unconscious on a smashed Ebon Hawk, not knowing who you are or what the heck happened to the ship... And there is no introduction to the Exile's past. You just know that you did something sinister and troubling in the past, but you don't know what it is, because you don't like remembering or talking about it... huh? By the time Bao-Dur turned up and called me general, I was both confused and annoying because the storytellers wouldn't let me know or identify with the character I was supposed to be role-playing. It's one thing that the ending was lost, but the beginning was actually messed up pretty badly too

I asked this a while ago, but nobody responded, so I'll just repost it in case nobody noticed. Of course, the restoration team may not have considered the following, but if you have, then I'd like to hear your thoughts...

Of course HK-47 will be back - HK-47 and T3 are the C-3PO and R2 of KotOR, so there is no doubt they'll return. Like the droids of the movies, the droids of KotOR are the only recurring characters that sort of binds it all together to a true saga. As for the Exile's companions, I'd bet that a good number of them will make appearances in the game, though it might only be cameo appearances. I particularly noted what Kreia told the Exile about them being the lost jedi, which suggests to me that they stayed together and tried to revive the dying jedi order when the Exile left to follow in Revan's footsteps in the unknown regions. And no doubt Mandalore will be back too. Heh, I want a scene where the group has to sneak into some place, then Mandalore turns and walks away just after saying, "I'll be back" Well, maybe not...

Definitely Darth Nihilus! And I even think there is really good plotwise reasons for having him/her (it?) make a return... I'd also like to see Jolee, Mission and Zaalbar again, but they just aren't as important to the plot as Nihilus.

I think a lot of people are overlooking something with regards to KotOR3. Everybody seems to want either Revan or the Exile (or both) back, and I tend to agree. Where I don't agree is when they conclude that to mean that you must begin as either of these characters. Come on, people - finding out just what happened to Revan and the Exile in the unknown regions is why we'll all be playing the game, if it's ever developed. It's a mystery. And more importantly, it's a selling point: "Find out what happened to your favorite characters - buy KotOR3 today!" It's a strength, and whoever gets to develop KotOR3 would be fools not to mine it. I see a lot of interesting plot potential in leaving the fates of these heroes as mysteries for the player to solve. But of course, that means you must begin the game as someone else, and that's why I support a padawan as a new main character - not to replace Revan or the Exile, but to find them and find out what happened to them, then join forces with them. Besides, Revan and the Exile are both powerful characters now. I really, *really* don't want to play another jedi who conveniently (there's that word again...) lost his jedi oomph... If I must begin play at level 1, then I'd much rather do it with a completely blank character - the jedi-with-troubled-past-or-amnesia plot device is fast getting very, very old in KotOR games, and it's really not going to work a third time. As for Revan and the Exile being of a particular gender or alignment, I really don't think it's going to be a problem. KotOR2 was very carefully written towards an ending where it really wouldn't matter in a third game whether Revan or the Exile ended up as good or bad, because no matter what they chose, they would have to fight the true Sith - good Revans/Exiles would fight to save the republic while evil Revans/Exiles would fight to overthrow the competing Sith and replace them as head of the true Sith empire... For similar reasons, I also think Revan and the Exile will both have fallen to the dark side by the beginning of KotOR3, no matter which sides they chose at the end of the previous games. Note what Kreia tells the Exile about Revan never falling but rather making a sacrifice. As I see it, Revan (good or evil) sent T3 and Kreia back to find the Exile, because he/she knew that he/she would need the Exile either as a powerful but loyal Sith apprentice to help challenge the true Sith for domination of their empire or (if they are both light side) to use the Exile's power of defying the will of the force to pull Revan back. After all, Revan has made the same choice that Ulic Qel-Droma (and Luke Skywalker too btw) did, but unlike Ulic Revan has made plans to secure the Exile has a "safety net" to save him/her - you cannot cheat the dark side, and Revan knows that, since that was the lesson Ulic learned the hard way. Now, the Exile is going to become dark sided too, but the Exile can defy the will of the force if necessary, and that is just the sort of strategy Revan would take advantage of - Revan knows there is no certainty that the Exile's special power can save them, but it's a possibility and therefore a tool he/she can (and will) use. Well, as I see it...

Really? Well, in that case I'll definitely make a note to set Revan's gender to female in KotOR3... But then I'm incurably male

Huh? When was that established? We've been nowhere near Coruscant so far, and I'm pretty sure that all we've ever heard of it was when Revan wondered why there was a council on Dantooine instead of Coruscant... At the risk of repeating myself - huh? Revan, yes. Exile, yes. But the Exile's companions? I doubt it. In fact, the end of KotOR2 suggests very clearly that the Exile must take Revan's choice and go into the unknown regions alone and leave his/her friends behind. Kreia even says that he/she cannot bring anyone he/she loves IIRC... Yes, it seems there'll be a new graphics engine from what rumors I've heard too. I don't particularly need one (getting the plot right and actually finishing the game has much higher priority for me), but I scarcely mind a new engine. As for who will be the main character, I think it should be both Revan, the Exile and a new character. You should begin as the new character and then meet the Exile and finally Revan alone the way, and they should all be active members in the group at all times, or else the game should split the protagonists into groups with each of the main characters in each of three groups, and each group then take their turn to play their part in the plot like the Freedon Nadd temple vs. Onderon civil war split in KotOR2.

Updating the video drivers seem to cause the problem rather than solve it, or so I hear. I have a Radeon 9800 pro card myself, but my main problem was with the grasslands on Dantooine, which slowed my game to the point of unplayability. Smoke also caused the game to slow, but nowhere nearly as much. Fortunately the solution is not so complex. Just open the swkotor2.ini file in notepad and add the line "Disable Vertex Buffer Objects=1" to the graphics options (just before the game options). Not sure if it works for anyone else, but it certainly made Dantooine playable for me. The graphics could still slow at times, but only to the point where I noticed it. Not sure why, but it worked like a charm for me.

Well, if your players have only played D&D before, then I find it best to throw some simple monster at them and have them all die trying to kill it... Sounds nasty, yes, but D&D-only players have a tendency to think mostly in hack n slash terms (kill the monsters and only think of what to do if everything else fails). A friend of mine once did this very thing (run a trial Cthulhu game for all D&D players). Now, this was 5th edition Cthulhu well before the d20/D&D Cthulhu, so the rules were much tougher and merciless than they are now. It was one of the classic adventures, where the investigators had to find and destroy just a single zombie. The players spent a lot of time roaming the house in search of their cannon fodder. When they failed, they eventually bought petroleum to burn it out, which led to them burning down about half of 1920 Boston.... " Now, that's not to diss on D&D players. I play D&D myself, but people who only play and only enjoy dungeon crawls and hack n slash really shouldn't play Cthulhu, because it's just not about making maps and killing monsters. In Cthulhu it's all about finding out what's going on and sacrificing your life (and your sanity!) to serve the greater good by stopping the ancient evils. And basically the characters are screwed either way, because there is no hope of matching the powers of the villains. This is the game where people happily cast the spell that summons Cthulhu (if they have it) full well knowing that they will themselves be killed by doing so, and yet they do it because it's the only way to stop the cultists from destroying the world... Players who don't get that or don't like that (which is fair enough - to each his own) should stay clear. That's not saying D&D players couldn't grow to like Cthulhu, though. After all, I played only D&D myself for many years before trying Cthulhu, and I like Cthulhu much better than D&D today. I'd suggest you let the players read a bit of Lovecraft's works. The game is named "Call of Cthulhu" for a reason, and reading the short story of same name should give people insight on whether it will appeal to them or not (even though that does reveal the existence of the Necronomicon...)

This thread goes a long way toward explaining why I hate alignments... I'm the GM of an AD&D 2e campaign, and I've banned alignments! Choosing an alignment is actually *verboten* for a player! Instead I will assign one as GM if and when I find it appropriate. Why? Because what a particular alignment means depends entirely on who you ask. Ask any player (or GM) about any alignment, and you get a different answer from everyone. With nine alignments, this means a group of four players and a GM will have five different interpretations of any one alignment for a total of 45, and that's way too many. I once had a player wanting to play neutral evil simply because he thought it was the alignment what would least limit his moral and ethical choices in the game. Think of that what you like, but it does show that players find alignments restrictive. I don't think so myself - alignments are descriptions, not straight-jackets, so neutral evil is just as "restrictive" as lawful good (remember, though paladins must be lawful good, that doesn't mean all lawful good characters must have a paladin's ethos - those restrictions on the paladin are found in the description of the class, not under the alignment description of lawful good). But most players don't see it that way, which causes no end of problems. Most other games but D&D have no alignments and still have no problems as a consequence - everybody understands that torturing a prisoner for information or selling people into slavery are not benevolent things to do... So I banned them and the game runs much smoother as a consequence - no player arguments about alignments being restrictive. And if you have any doubt about alignments causing more problems than they solve, just read this entire topic... The defense rests

Well, yes and no... We used to use them a lot more than a decade ago, both to represent combat and to help as a visual aid for our imaginations for our characters. However, for the last several years, we've only used them occassionally, and then only because we have them. In most gaming session we never use them. After all, we might as well since we have them, but we scarcely have a need for it. As GM I frequently find it too time-consuming in an already lengthy combat situation to also have to move little figures around, especially if there is a large number of enemies, who will swarm the PCs in any event...

Yes, but KotOR3 won't be a game about the Mandalorians struggle to prepare for the coming war - it will be a game about the struggles of the remaining jedi to find Revan, confront the true Sith, and save the Republic. All of the preparations of Mandalore/Canderous can be easily established in a few conversations and cutscenes. There just doesn't seem to be any need to have jedi go to the Mandalorian homeworld to help with this. Besides, you said yourself that Mandalore shouldn't be a group member this time around, because he would be too busy preparing his people for war to hang around the Ebon Hawk. How does that add up? It would be far more impressive to me to have the protagonists of the new game finallly find Revan and bring him/her back to a Republic driven to to the brink of disaster and then have Mandalore casually turn up and say, "Good to see you again, Revan. The Mandalorians are ready to follow your commands!"

I see what you mean, but I don't think the way is was done was what hurt the story. The missing content - particularly closure - is what hurt the story. As far as I'm concerned, the real problem with Nihilus wasn't that we met him too early in the plot, but rather than he was such a damn pushover. I mean, a couple of swipes from your lightsabers and down he goes... And this is the guy who eats planets and jedi gatherings for breakfast? Sure, there is a good reason why he cannot hurt the Exile, but I still don't think the fight should have been quite *that* easy... But either way, the plot point about Nihilus is that he is so powerful, but suddenly he cringes and falls over when he tries to "eat" the Exile. Why? Why is the Exile so special? Well, that's the mystery, and you don't get the answer until Kreia tells you at the very end. Plotwise it all hangs together nicely. You don't go to Malachor V to kill the game's greatest baddies, you go there to resolve Kreia's treachery and learn the final answers to all the open questions *after* you've killed the big boss of the game. But I'll grant you that the major boss was a let-down and that it all could (and should) have been told better. For example, it should have suddenly been a problem that you actually don't face Nihilus alone, since he would just continue to suck power from your companions. But alas, LA has spoken..

Some of us are old enough to have done just that, and I dare say Empire was and remains an underestimated success in that category - it is my favorite Star Wars movie. KotOR2, however, is similar to what Empire would have been after you see you see Luke escape Vader, the Millennium Falcon picks him up and then promptly jumps to hyperspace without the Empire interfering, then fade to black and end titles. There is no comparison. Empire had the Falcon struggle to escape Vader while letting Luke and Vader struggle with their relationship through the force, and after the Falcon escapes, we still get closure to that part of the chapter with Lando and Chewie going off to track Han, Luke staying to continue learning while recovering in time for the next round we know will be coming sometime, somewhere... It's an unfinished story, but it has closure internally, since you know where the characters and the plots are left off. I didn't leave the theatre feeling cheating out of an ending - I left with suspenseful impatience at what would happen next. KotOR2, however, just skips straight to the end titles. Like I said, there is no comparison.

It is ambiguous, which is probably intentional. After all, it could refer to both of the options you mention (the fall of the republic or the last stand of the republic), or it could refer to the last jedi knights left to defend the republic against the true Sith. Personally I find that ambiguity in a title is a cool thing. Just think of "Attack of the Clones" - that certainly had a bit of a twist as to how the whole thing turned out