Tale

And if the game does the same? Why would it be so different??? Arrogant players and munchkins detract from a group. Single players detract from nobody.

Is it stalling on the system question for anyone else?

The questions seem good, if already answered for those of us following so passionately. I really liked the question about monsters. Too bad it lacked information.

Yes. But the question is why do you need a [Lie] tag to do any of those things? I agree on most of what you're saying, but this is the part I find unnecessary. If I was being manipulative, that should be between me and nobody. Quite frankly, this is exactly the playstyle I've been using for years. We all have. We flatter the NPCs, we say what they want to hear, we do the quests the way they want them done. And we do it like sociopaths, we do it not because we agree, we do it because we expect to get something out of it. And that's how I've justified my Lawful Evil characters for years.

Every single final battle in a BG game is the bane of my existence. Planescape and Arcanum's were far more satisfying.

A quest isn't defined by a quest giver. A quest is defined by the challenges. So is avoiding it should it seek you out or be in your way. The flight from the ringwraiths was no small feat. The death of the Witch-King was anti-climactic by comparison.

Everything in the game world should exist to provide the players with an interesting experience. That can involve not stroking their ego and without killing. Just make sure it's not about belittling them for petty reasons. Too many DMs fall for that trap and try to hide behind higher ideals. Teaching the player is, in my opinion, an interesting thing. But the line between teaching and obnoxious preaching is hard for some to see. I think the healthy approach is to maintain a level of consistency. And focus on using rewards for appreciated behavior instead of punishment for behaviors your dislike. Give them a weapon for minding the signs, don't set them back an hour for not.

I'm not sure XP is supposed to represent general heroism. Should the player lose XP for himself killing townsfolk? It should be for overcoming challenges. Monsters threatening townsfolk can be a challenge and if they're killing people, that should be an XP granting quest of its own, not just taking a necklace.

I thought about asking people how it was. But everyone's busy with XCOM.

I hope he's a drunk.

Only if the alternative paths are not designed in accordance with their intended difficulty. Sneaking past a major boss fight should be an interesting experience on its own. Perhaps even challenging, with something more complex than pass/fail. Same goes for a dialogue encounter.

Ideally, the game should offer the followup anyway. The game shouldn't have to keep track, it should just assume it's always possible the player was. This is only interesting if there's a bluff mechanic. See my next point for the problem with it, though. If the game is going to offer the [Lie] option and the [Truth] option, but then penalize the player by making the Lie seen through, then all you're doing is punishing the player for being honest with the game. It's kicking the player for playing along. Which is just kind of a jerk move. The best method I have found is to immediately assume the player is telling the truth, but allow for the player to act or follow it up contrary. And you should never turn words into actions for the player. If a character is to assume the player is lying, they should do it according solely to their characterization or based on the facts of behavior. What about trying to save the children but failing? What exactly do you expect the endgame of that scenario to be, if not identical? If the game treats it any differently, then it threatens to invalidate the deception.

But there's two of you!

I'm not socialized well enough to really understand the point of memorialization. But I suspect they're often as much about comforting those who grieve as they are in honoring the mentioned. If it helps you, I do not see it as a bad idea.

For those lies, what's the point in a mechanical distinction? It's exclusively in intent, a value of no worth outside an alignment system.

Are we talking about "[Lie] I will save the children" options or just the options to say "I will save the children" and you simply don't do it? I prefer the latter, in all honesty.

Of course but that requires ALL spells that are on cooldown to be such spells that are not that useful to cast early in a battle. I don't follow. Mass Heal's situational nature is agnostic to fireball's. But whatever else might limit the use of Mass Heal still presents that tactical consideration. Do I use X now and risk being unable to use Y the moment I need it? That's far from the only logical explanation. There's other possibilities, such as allowing for longer multi-stage fights with resets (even Neverwinter Nights 2 did this during the King of Shadows fight). Or for allowing recovery if you screw up early and put on cooldown things you need later on, without forcing it to be a total wipe because you can no longer breach protections.

Calling Ammon Jerro a wizard. FOR SHAME URQUHART

There are so many game of the year awards, it seems hard not to get one. Every single publication has their own game of the year, then they also have genre game of the year awards.

Considering the titles they're looking to for inspiration, I don't think there's anything to "remove." Though I do hope they make the journal more navigable than is traditional. I'm talking about giving every quest a dedicated page and bookmark, instead of just lumping everything together.

This would be an acceptable alternative to feathered dinosaurs.

The big question on everyone's mind, will Project Eternity have dinosaurs? What kind of dinosaurs? Will they be animal companions? Will there be a Dinosauria race as playable? To temper my own enthusiasm, they're not that original. But one thing that's really underdone is showing their contemporary representation, feathered. That's what I would like to see, a nice big feathered Tyrannosaurid. Do you think they're simply overdone? Do you want to see them as monsters or NPCs? A new, updated take?

The only way for this to happen is if there's no situational value to the spells. Why would you blow Mass Heal when you only need to Heal one person? You might get Mass Heal back before the fight is over, but you're going to spend who knows how long without it available and you might actually need it.

What games have you been playing?

Baldur's Gate had reputation. It had alignment, too, but it wasn't an implementation that adjusted for actions.