-Zin-

A bit wasted potential, but I do appreciate the clarity in that there's no need to play it. Sweet catch, Sacred

I didn't purposely create the same thread three times. I hit 'back' after creating this thread and it must've created duplicates. It's been explained in this thread already. Sometimes accidents happen. What are ya gonna do? Also, I'm not 'whining' or being 'mad'. I'm just explaining that the dungeon is supposedly a big deal, but the world doesn't react in accordance to it. I'm not going to spoil anything from BG, but before you enter Watcher's Keep, everyone there sort of knows who you are. You're a very specific heroic/villanous figure with quite the reputation behind you. There's this gr

Then why didn't you? The place was added for people who like big ass dungeons with lots of puzzles and combat. There was no sign saying nothing would be different. I made that point already if you read the whole post.

Wait, you're unhappy because, despite all of your accomplishments, the nobility is still snobbish toward low-born peasants like you? Guess what, me bucko... that's normal. ... Must avoid.. spoilers... EDIT: Also, sorry for the duplicate threads, gfted1. Thanks for removing them Must've been a browser related problem

Well, I recently completed a long and very boring section from Baldur's Gate 2. The section was called the Watcher's Keep. It was an 8 level long dungeon with a lot of random and soulless combat/puzzles. It was very long and boring and with no real relevance to anything outside the dungeon. I could literally have skipped it and nothing would be different. When you leave that place, you're not more famous even though there's a reputation system within the game. No one will react differently to you. In fact, the first thing that happened when my character returned to the city was that a huma

I suppose that's fine, but honestly if happy endings are just a form of pandering to hypersensitive individuals, must we include them at all? Troll opinion is troll opinion. "I suppose that's fine, but honestly if happy endings are just a form of pandering to undersensitive individuals, must me include bad endings at all?" Works both ways. The coolest thing to do is having both. Not just one of the mentioned options. In a game about choice, there should be many outcomes, or there's not any point in inculding choices to begin with.

This is a feature for Expert difficulty and Iron Man difficulty, the two things I won't play. I'm all for something called FUN. I don't mind recruiting folks I won't use and shove them into my spaceship. "Get in there, you stupid jerks." "Aaaah, but it won't fit!" Even though they end up on the B-team or even C-team, I still like their dialouge. I'm probably just a class that's incompatible with their skills often enough. Sometimes I bring along characters I don't like, but who are extremely useful to open locks for instance. In my first game, I might have been lucky enough to be the tank,

I don't mind the sudden HP/Mana recovery. It's like.. "Ah, I'm losing I'm losing.... No wait! There is hope! *Kills a trash mob*" "Hah, why did you waste a precious attack round to kill a minion and not me, the boss, nyah!?" "Because I only needed 23 experience points to level up! BOO YAH!" "Oh noesh! He's getting HP back!" *Insert heroic battle theme* It's a rarely a dramatic moment like this happens, but when it does.. Man it's so satisfying. In many games this doesn't make sense, but it's epic as all hell that you just run with it. Actually.. what game had that bit where you leveled

Welcome, brother from another mother *Fistbump* Glad to have you with us

Well, if Forton wasn't a joke... he is now. And a meme.

In general D&D, yes. NWN the computer game, no. Mrm.. there were certain scripted special fights that stopped when the enemy reached low HP. You could now offer the enemy mercy, or to kill him in a very evil manner. Though you could offer mercy to some, you did kill a lot of enemies.

Okay... In BG 1-2 and IWD monks weren't that powerful from my understanding. That was fixed in in newer DnD rules and NWN1-2. Monks are capable of having great gear (Robes for armor), and kick ass feats. I didn't much care for the loot drops in NWN 1-2 though, but I did PvP a lot. I built a lot of overpowered characters in the toolset, but I did so within a set of rule restrictions. I stuck to legal item restriction limit. My level 20 monks had gear common that was equivelent for a level 20 to own. In the toolset, you had an automatic measurer which kept tab on how powerful an item was. Certai

Looking forward to seeing monks pound some sense into people clinging to their 'realistic' full plates. We also got magical gear and spells that can render all 'practical' looks meaningless. That's marvelous considering PE is a fantasy game. Hm? Oh yeah. "You can kiss our non-armored cod piece, you stinkin' no good armor-lovers!" Hehe, nah just kidding. I like realistic armors too. It's important to pick a consistent theme. However, I want the really rare armors/weapons to look high fantasy-like and not necessarily practical. We're playing a fantasy game so I'd like to see a lot of variety

I think most RPGs are fine as they as they are. In KOTOR 2, nameless Siths in masks, who are trained expert assassins and have killed many before, volunteerly attacks you, a Jedi. Their training says you're a capable opponent, and they know what they're about to get into. They have every chance to back away, but still choose to ambush and attack you. It's not a morally wrong choice to pick up the Jedi weapon that they predicted you would use, and slash them down in an expected fashion. They got EXACTLY what they wanted to see from you, and someone has to bring justice to them. Enemy guards

I don't think anyone said there shouldn't be an Iron Man mode. I'm not gonna use it, but that doesn't mean others can't enjoy it. If someone said: "I don't like this optional mode therefore, none shall use it! Make it not available. Nyargh" then that person is off his/her trolley.

Hm, yeah, those are some very valid points. I respect them completely and feel free to carry on

A right use of rape in stories .. You know what? I'm actually not a fan. It removes the entertainment value for me. It's just a very distasteful story-mechanic and I sort of become bored and uncaring at that point. Rape isn't a mature thing. In fact, it's just the exact oposite. It's an immature tool used by a person who can't attract the other person by being his/her natural self, or maybe he/she is just trying to insult the victim. Rape isn't a big deal to me. In truth, rape only devalues the person commiting the act, not the victim. I feel the criminal isn't worth a second thought at that m

I will win teh shecks and see 1 seconds of boobies for teh lulz

S'not like anything we say here will have an effect. Flippety flappety floo.

True. I didn't think saving Connor was emotionally important for me, but I still liked the quest. The Connor situation was properly established and then the game looked to you, and asked what you wanted to do. There were some arguements for killing him and against killing him. You could do whatever you wanted within reason. But yeah, sometimes games fail here. If a game offers you many choices, but then takes it away at character defining moments, then the game has failed. You've already mentioned a few good examples, but yeah, there are definetly many badly written choices... Especially when

True, but I think it always comes down to having the best actors, the best writing, and having a lot of time to tend to production of the scene. If one spends a lot of time perfecting a scene, the better it usually becomes. On that note, seriously George Lucas, stop putting so much pointless crap in front of the camera that it's hard to see what's going on. You needlessly over-compliate too many scenes that should be simple. Anyway, I think it's just a matter of keeping things realistic with the production schedule. There's just not enough time to make all the scenes look/sound/feel this o

Optimizing the forum is cool with me. Not on the top to do list, but in the future I wouldn't mind seeing more threads posted in the right categories. Mmm, systemizing and diagrams....

Yeah, true. As I was writing about the weird nature of barging into random's people's home and looting their stuff, I did recall Baldur's Gate. I had forgotten that the families there did complain if you took their stuff. I had forgotten because Dragon Age was supposed to be the spirtual successor, better in every way, but Dragon Age is like a step backwards in that area lol But you're right, a lot of games are handling that aspect pretty decently already. Still, there is something off about stepping into people's home randomly. Maybe if was established more clearly that you could be invit

Well, one thing that I always found weird was that in a lot of games like Zelda, Dragon Age, KOTOR 1, is that you can just run into a house, loot it clean, and the family living there doesn't even care. I actually think it's a little weird to enter random NPC's houses to even get a quest. In real life, no one really barges into random people's home and ask if they need help. If a random person is in a random person's home like that, he/she is probably there to steal/loot. I would like it if only 2 out of a 100 houses have a quest in them. In most cases, the people/families in there would insi

I would like to see synergies as well. For instance, that Rogues are compatible with Mages. Rogues squirt some sort of oil on their enemies to make them lose balance and get lower attack rate and accuracy, but this also makes the enemies extremely vulnerable to fire spells, like fireball. Or enemies who are magically turned to stone/ice would be very vulnerable to a crushing blow from a warrior etc