Tale

I've got nothing against the chosen one if he's chosen for a reason. Was he created from whole cloth out of a need to conquer the evil? Did he accomplish something great that garnered him the attention of the choosers? Did he choose himself after seeing what needed to be done? Finding out why the chosen was chosen can be as, and can potentially be more, interesting than what he or she was chosen to do. I think random providence is a little weak. Just being in the right place at the right time. As if the world is saved or destroyed with the initial roll of a die. Where if the hero had slept in 15 minutes everyone would be on the road to total doom. Unless there's a thematic point to be made out of such coincidence.

Just got through the Orc caves in Neverwinter Nights 2. I really hate that section. It's too long and there's too much junk loot.

I've always been a fan of trans-kobolds.

No, I do not think I am confused. I'm not saying they're good guys from a different perspective. I'm asking what could have caused them to abandon everything? And did they truly abandon everything? What did they leave behind? I'm looking for more than just an NPC with bandit over his head that yields 35 xp and 2 coins when his HP hits 0. I'm looking for a guy who had a name, had a history, some evidence that he existed as a character in this world with people who knew him. That there's more to his situation than stabs and loot.

I don't think there's been major recognition of the personal lives of our XP pinatas. It's something I would like to see explored. Despite their suicidal tendencies to rush at demi-gods in the hopes of obtaining pocket change, surely some of them must have loved ones. Wives and children. Parents. Maybe a few of them hung with the wrong crowd. Maybe they're poor and desperate. Could they be refugees of the war? Exiles with nowhere to go? It's not simply an idea to make them sympathetic, but to give them motivations and families is to better place them in the ecosystem and aid in bringing them to life before and after they are gibbed in a single critical hit. Remember all those copper rings that were barely worth their weight that you've looted in games of the past? Maybe those rings have inscriptions. "To my dear husband, Reginald. From Patrice." Is the bandit Reginald, or did the bandit kill Reginald? And maybe Patrice would like to have the ring back to remember her husband by. Or quests could appear from the other angle. Patrice's husband has gone missing and she fears bandits have captured him. Little does she know the truth. Maybe the player will never really know. Just how many bandits will we kill and what does that mean for the local populace to lose so many able men? What does it mean that so many felt compelled to banditry in the first place?

I'm immune to spoilers. I find more enjoyment in seeing the craft than being surprised.

That little tangent seemed to touch a nerve. Let's get back again.

Different communities have different cultures. It's hard to see the overarching elements of a community are when you're on the inside, because you're used to the subtleties and diversity. But then what value are the overarching elements for the diversity? Either way, it doesn't seem valuable to try to guess where each other is from. It may hint towards what bias the other person has, but it's not really relevant for the value of their opinion or argument.

Too many? Too many for what? Too many for anything else to be possible? Too many to bother playing Baldur's Gate and see how coop affected the singleplayer experience there? EDIT: At least you're willing to admit that your basing your intuition on a situation that's generally not analogous to the situation at hand. I don't think Baldur's Gate had the single player adversely affected by the multiplayer. That's absolutely a fair point. However, the counter point is I think the single player adversely affected the multiplayer. The multiplayer wasn't very well done. It was just acceptable. And doing that kind of half-measure seems a bit wasteful considering the effort required.

I love Baldur's Gate 2's map. Absolutely love it. I still see lots of appeal in Arcanum/Fallout style map, however. Enough so that if you could have Arcanum/Fallout while looking like Baldur's Gate 2, I'd be ecstatic.

Who?

It did seem strange.

There's a gigantic chart.

I really like the adventurer guild idea. I mean I really like it.

I don't see why it needs to be perfectly representative of ancestry. Mixed races are diverse, sure, but so are any of the pure races. It doesn't mean humans are going to get a selection of racial abilities. They just get to mix around their stat allocation. A half-elf race is already part of a spectrum. The elf race and humans are sides of it, nobody says that picking an elf has to be pure. It can be mixed too, just one that favors the elf traits. The human race favors the human traits. Half-elf is balanced. More granularity than that is appreciable, but not necessary.

Stay on track.

I'm not addicted, I can quit Claudia Black any time. If I wanted to. I just might after this next Farscape marathon and my next playthrough of DAO. It's easy! But seriously, I like your insights. While I consider myself part of the anti camp, I still think there'd be value in a romance that specifically bucked the trend and expectations for romances. That seems right up Obsidian's alley and consistent with past works. If you look at Neeshka, where there wasn't what most would consider a romance, and Bishop, where he betrays you even if you romance him. In New Vegas there was Veronica and Arcade, who weren't even technically romances, but the conclusions of their questline could end up with them leaving your party entirely despite doing everything to an ideal. With Sawyer at the helm, I think the game could very easily end up with a romance that ends on a sour note with the partner leaving after nicking half your stuff. Or even something far more subtle completely lacking any lovey-dovey interactions that I think most people are after. I think there'd be a value to the game thematically and for medium growth despite the fact that lots of people seemed to get the wrong idea from romeo and juliet. But only if they make an effort to go against the grain.

I don't think it's really a good idea to end up with dueling polls because everyone thinks that their poll is better worded. The discussion is where the meat of insight is to be gained anyway. The previous poll can be found here: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/60531-should-there-be-player-generatable-companions/

I think there's a philosophical objection to romances from many of the people against them. Even if it is irrationally rooted. I don't think there's the same, or at least it's not as widespread, for classes people don't like. I don't think there's a contingent that thinks Clerics are part of the reason RPGs have declined in recent years.

The other thread has been far more active of late, so let's try to keep it all in there. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/60065-merged-co-op-multiplayer-as-some-potential-future-stretchgoal/

I hate everything about that sword.

There is constant exposure. They have an update every single day so far.

I think the vast majority would want to see those resources put into the game proper, not tie-ins.

I also suspect they're trying to do a strategic rollout of information during the Kickstarter. So they can have new information every day. Maybe one day will be concept art day.

I think it was implied that they're all relatively sapient, but I hope that's not true. I'd like some of the gods to be not. Just so that it can imply that there's this whole other ecosystem to the godly realm that interacts recklessly with the mortal one.