Tale

Squad broken! If we hit the Adventurer's Hall, I see this being more likely. Someone asked about this level of reactivity in one the Kickstarter Q&As with Feargus, it sounded like they weren't quite set one way or another.

I'm comfortable with the stretch goals we have now. Whatever next is icing to me, at this point. Orchestral music seems like fine icing.

This all or nothing, one or the other, everything in absolutes mentality... I don't want to say it "worries" me, but it is definitely disappointing to see people espouse. Dragon Age 1 and 2 have their good points and bad parts. In the overall evaluation, the bad may outweight the good, especially true for Dragon Age 2. But they are still a sum of parts. They weren't just cooldowns, or just romances, they weren't marked solely by the lack of vancian casting and 8 hour rest periods. And not all who favor maybe one element inherently favor the rest. Not all paths lead straight to Dragon Age. Why are we even talking about Dragon Age in the first place? The good things of classic RPGs, notably the Infinity Engine games, weren't some precarious construction perfectly balanced on a cliff's edge, so close to total ruination it would topple if one single thing had been changed. They weren't even a unified whole. There were romances and multiplayer in some of the titles. This notion that any deviation from specific commonalities, specified almost entirely by pet features of the individual and not honest system appraisal, would inevitably lead to next-gen (a console concept, nearly irrelevant in the PC space) control schemes and romances is so senseless that I feel I have been lessened for my exposure to the idea.

Thief faction or just a general "Key? I don't need no key" t-shirt? I was thinking it might be more along the lines of "keeper of secrets." Keys are popular symbols for the hidden or locked away.

It seems to be one of the major elements that divides this world from reality. They know souls exist andtheir souls have enabled them to do great things. I don't think the point is to be charming. But a unifying element of the setting.

The emblem on his armor is a key. I wonder if there's any meaning to that.

Yeah, the real cool demi-humans are crabmen, with their natural weapons and armor. Feargus keeps promising bizarre. The wait is killing me.

I don't expect the Rogue to be a dedicated skill monkey. They sound as if skills will be spread amongst the group. You might as well throw him in as a warrior class.

200 NPCs sounds like a lot. And, well it is a lot if it's not including bandits. However, it's been so long since a 2D isometric RPG has been done that aren't accommodating consoles, we may just have become accustomed to sparse towns. Still, crowdsourcing background NPCs isn't a completely terrible idea. Name a group of chatterboxes in the market. Name a family whose house can have their shelves raided for 3 gold pieces. Pick out their color scheme and garish hats.

There's only a total of 116 backers in that tier. If that's true, it's going to be an incredibly quiet forum. As I understand, it's primarily for talking about the items they're helping to design. Not a high roller's suite. But that's just the impression I got from the one comment I read. Don't take that as me knowing what I'm talking about.

I've been an advocate since a developer first suggested it. If we don't make it, I'll be sad.

You're being silly. Elves are a sapient race like any other. They do magic, they live, they love, they fight, they have souls. It's those lazy no-good Halflings that are probably without. On that note, I do hope there's some significant racial distinctions. It sounds like it, but we'll see.

I haven't heard anything about it being unrated. I swear one of the interviews mentioned them going for an M rating.

Seen the movie, have it installed on my computer. Have not made time for it, however.

There's numerous ways that evolutionary paths can go. One path leading to a dead end doesn't imply stasis is the solution. Bioware's changes were largely around becoming cinematic. Cutscenes and voices and all these things set to focus on a limited set of emotional outcomes enhanced by sight and sound. And because it makes for better screenshots that marketing loves. Everything spiraled out of that. Better spell effects mean fewer spells. Better armor graphics mean fewer armors. More voice means less dialogue. I haven't seen the word cinematic come out as a direction for this project once. Bioware wasn't trying to improve the gameplay of the genre. They were sacrificing it for 3D graphics and dynamic camera angles. The best example of this is how they completely abandoned tactical party control for ceilings.

Are you wishing to imply the problem with DA2 is a lack of tedium?

No, that's a face imploding.

Both Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines: Revenge of the Colon and Divinity 2 have done things in this regard. And yeah, it provides new and easy solutions to some quests. Heck, Arcanum let you speak to the dead, which was tremendously helpful in finding out who killed him. With people who have DM experience at the helm, I hope they can fit it in the scope.

Torment didn't have Bards. And the one Paladin in it was evil. It specifically avoided or defied many tropes.

There is a certain mindset amongst certain players that Paladins are a useless, pointless, stupid class. Usually amongst players of rogues or necromancers, or generally evil aligned players... or players who hate alignment. "Lawful stupid" I'm sure you've heard before. Lawful Stupid is a player, not a class. Paladins aren't Lawful Stupid. Spectacularly bad Paladin players can be.

But that doesn't mean we can't have some original and unique. I don't see it as all or nothing. I'm not sold. "Classic classes" aren't old school. They're every school. Even new RPGs still have mages, fighters, rogues, bards, and the like. They still have elves and dwarves. They're standard today, not just yesterday. You won't find new classes in new RPGs either. But what we had yesterday that we lost today is Planescape and Dark Sun. Settings that were different.

I'm going to be a broken record here. When the question is asked, I always push for new. Bards and Paladins aren't new. The classes we already have announced aren't new either, but that's a lost battle for me. I've only played one computer fantasy roleplaying game that had psionics in it, so as far as I'm concerned that's pretty exciting. I'm not against using classics, don't get me wrong. But if we only have two possible classes left, I want to see something I haven't seen as much before. I'll still be excited and hopeful for the game if all the classes and races are things I've seen before. So until that's set in stone, I'm going to push for new things. Because if I can carve out just a tiny little hole where there's a four-armed insectoid race or playable blob and a class where the theme is throwing furniture or long-distance spitting, I'll be ecstatic. Not to say that I should derail this thread with nay-saying. But you asked why not.

I like dilemmas. I hate forced dilemmas. I think the distinction comes from approach. If you you start off with a simple concept then say "I want this to be difficult" you're working against yourself. Like a bank robbery. This can be pretty simple. The robbers are bad guys. If you try and force a twist into it where the robbers are good guys, the bank is evil, you might not end up doing something good. Maybe you will, but your starting place worked against you. A good dilemma starts with the understanding that everyone has their own stance that is right for them. A conflict over limited resources that can't please everyone. But each group doesn't want their people to be without. And this leads to conflict. Even the bank robbers have something like this, they each have families to feed and they don't care about the bank. It all depends on where you start. Do you understand that the situation is naturally complex? Or are you looking to complicate it?

Poll added at OP request.