Triple - A Foxy Lad

i was actually a fan of this approach. rivalmances are sexy af and offer means for different mc concepts to pursue the same character. im sad nothing more came from this.

Im taking this as good news. im pro romance, but efforts at such rarely gel for me in open world rpgs. I feel u cant have a world-shaking 'no one exists but us and the stars' romance *and* have it as an optional extra to the main plot. Ur better off with a little tension and suggestion so the fanfic inclined can go follow the breadcrumbs for hundreds and thousands of words. Feel obs have had a few quiet successes tho. Kotor2 did quite well with atton. If u were fem exile, then his hopeless infatuation was touching and relevant without needing any reciprocation from the player. It could remain as a core-ish plot thing. Did also quite like tekehu. That was played fairly well - no happy ever after, hes a sympathetic warm body who lets u come and go without ill feeling. That was the kind of approach needed for an optional romance in an obs game imo. A romance with an end. I did enjoy the pairing off of maia and xoti. Might be something to be said for keeping things intra-companion. U can actually make the romance inevitable and tie it to bigger plot beats. Guess that would meet resistance elsewhere tho Eh but for the most part tho, i feel there are structural obstacles between the confetti shower bioware thing and what obs do. Ill stick to VNs and writing my own stuff for my fix. Obs' writers can give it a shot and good luck to them - im willing to be surprised - but they neednt put that effort in on my account.

I couldnt whittle down the list to 3, but i feel obliged to give shout outs to Shin Megami Tensei III and Arkane's reboot of Prey. both a little off the beaten track for different reasons but worthy of recognition imo. I legit cant praise Prey enough. It hit me in a way only one other game managed - eric chahi's 'another world'. SMT:III is a simple thing. A dungeon crawl that found the right frame for its gameplay. dont feel atlus quite got the chemistry down again, tho theyve done all right since - better than all right. tbh, most of the standard CRPG canon is on the same level for me. What i have a hankering for depends on what side of the bed i wake up. i do replay BG1 more than is decent. god knows why. Its just low-intensity and inconsequential enough that i can forget myself.

well they can go fire their canon mc out of a cannon. anyhoo petty complaint that doesnt really impact game. i only bothered checking bcs i was waiting for my tea to cool. it just got my back up for being a big ol' unforced error. like im more lenient re: the balance / encounter design gremlins cos that **** is hard. same with the writing issues. editing is crazy time consuming. but this? no excuse i can see. i could also mention the optics of giving the masc white dude 'proper' MC status - and better stats than all the other MC options, but *shush*, keep it down, triple. dont need peeps spotting and slotting that open goal. Guess it goes hand in hand with what i said earlier about them making the straight characters lawful and the bisexual deviants chaotic. whoops. im not the most outrage-prone pup - its a niche video game, after all, not a government policy - but all this at least warrants an eye-roll and a catty remark.

considering all the excitement with outer worlds and so forth, i feel slightly petty - coming back after a week to get hung up on this - but here we go. why the fk does the pregen character Hedwirg get a 32 point buy - when all the other pregens and ur custom character get 25 point? its like owlcat are saying: 'yeah, u can make ur own baron, but we all know this hunky whitebread mans the REAL main character, not ur mary sue, pfft.' just... why do that? how does something that daft get through development and public beta? did no one stick up their hand and say 'er... lads? maybe just whack his strength down to 18 so peeps dont feel like mugs for wanting to play something other than the lead dev's self insert?' (okay, so hedwirgs prob not the lead dev's self-insert. but yknow, im struggling for alternative explanations here) i can sort of understand ur npcs having wonky point-buy totals. dunno if i approve in all cases, but i get it. this, i dont get. some of owlcats shenanigans i can put down to inexperience. this seems straight up wilful. lol.

this just has to be done. check this bad boy out if ur wondering what ser lightfoot means. for the record, i havent finished it and have no intention of doing so. dont hate myself that much.

think the term ur looking for is 'copywriter', not publicist. yep, explaining things is that hard. the game comes with a massive encyclopedia, written in pretty concise English, and there are hyperlinks everywhere. like, im garbage at learning systems. whenever we bust out a new boardgame, i get someone else to learn the rules for me. ive lost count of the times weve gone scurrying to reddit etc looking for clarification on ambiguously worded manuals. but even a dullard like me can scan through deadfires cyclopedia and understand most of it. like how intuitive do you expect any complex new system will be? take, for example, numenera. its a crazy simple system, but it took me hours to read it and learn it well enough to dm it confidently, because it was new rather than another d20 knockoff, and i had to internalise hella new concepts. Also, i have to restate. ur named after two characters from a 2e ad&d game. THAC0 tables, man. *THAC0 TABLES*. also the totally arbitary progression of bonuses tied to abilities - like okay, STR does nothing until 16 when it adds one to ur damage roll? AC goes down? Leather armour says AC 8 when it decreases ur AC by 2? the one-shot RNG of d20 + a 4hp lv1 mage? the video games themselves making little effort to explain *anything*? ye, but if ur new to the system, ur straight up not going to know that **** until uve put it into practice. thats part of the appeal of these games for many people, putting in the graft to learn and master a new system, taking advantage of quirks and stuff. like the first time my brother played Dark Souls, he built a pretty useless character because the games good at letting u do that. he just shrugged it off and did better the next time around. and u should watch people trying to learn League of Legends, thats always a laugh. like, if u think its opaque, then... i dunno, i hate to get all 'back in my day' etc. but i dont think yall appreciate just how bad things could get. like in the notorious synnibarr u had to calculate the square root of things. and im sure theres some crazy wargame somewhere that uses logarithms. if u can imagine it, it probably exists. and for contemporary stuff, look at kingmaker. the encyclopedia's not as good despite being based on an established system, and newcomers to the game or 3.5e are highly unlikely to come up with viable builds until the cosh of experience has fked them over - unlike deadfire, the games not balanced to let a broadly rational but new player blunder through it. Also have u seen the maths behind most JRPGs? theyre the stuff of nightmares. that genre typically doesnt explain anything. it coasts on trivial difficulty and the ability of the player to beat challenges through raw attrition. if u want a er, 'laugh' trundle over to good ol gamefaqs and look up the giant txt files explaining the inner workings of something like FFVII. its horrifying. like i just screengrabbed that at random. there are prob worse examples. honestly, ill leave judging the system itself to peeps with a better mind for it. but the presentation of deadfires system makes me proper wet. i want more in that vein, not less.

im not the best person to explain all the ins and outs, but system is essentially d100 most rolls are resolved via d100 + accuracy - (defensive stat). if u roll under 15 u miss, under 50 u graze. 100+ is a crit. grazes are -50% damage/duration. crits +50% damage/duration most % changes are additive as far as i can tell. if u hit someone for 20 damage and u have +30% from ur weapon (6) and +20% from ur might (4), ull do 30 damage. things get a bit more complex with lashes and stuff. i know in poe1 u could pick talents that modified the damage *before* the % might increase, making it multiplicative rather than additive, but ud have to ask once of the systems dudes like boeroer or maxquest about that. tbh, this is just a feature of most tabletop systems. like u could never be certain of a result bcs u never knew when the d20 was going to fk u over. PoE's system is actually designed to be *more* predictable and with more graded outcomes rather than the binary pass/fail of dnd. Like if u play something like baldurs gate or kingmaker ull see the RNG is far more severe. EDIT: also i have to give a shout-out to baldurs gate for dropping the counter-intuitive madness of AD&D/2e upon u without any explanation. 'Siri, what is "THAC0"?' lol.

If you indeed feel like that, it means mega-corporations succeeded in their campaign to indoctrinate the gamers. "Games as services" is much more convenient for corporations, hence populous better begin to believe it's exactly what populous wants. eh, dunno mang. i feel this is more driven by consumer culture in general. i suspect devs and games publishers would rather deal with happy, fluffy fandom people drawing fanart (ie free advertising) than get dealt scars for not meeting 100,000 unique and poorly communicated service level agreements.

eh, is inevitable really. an rpg without conflicts to resolve is an rpg with little content. im okay with this design decision, but many folk arent. feel its the sort of thing that works better in a shorter, replayable game like tyranny. for stuff like pillars, peeps like to plan and execute their 100% perfect playthroughs. lmao think this just shows up the limitations of ambient dialogue. sometimes is better for unimportant characters to just stfu. world might have benefited from torments approach of littering the place with generic thugs wholl pull a knife on u if u engage them in conversation. would have left designers with a nice convenient copy+paste routine for filling in awkward gaps where ud expect more hostility. re: the narcissist thing. ive noticed tendency for gamers to throw toys out of pram when confronted with fatalism, powerlessness and 'railroading'. if u dont enable peoples fantasies - or their preconceptions of individual agency - they take to the internet and fk ur **** up. i kind of understand. everyone wants to be the centre of attention at some point. esp if they feel worthless irl - but i feel it can, and does, result in a denial of new experiences and people. feel deadfire is strange example of this pandering tendency tho. u r plaything of gods, u r bounced between political factions and theres no perfect way of resolving them. eothas largely does what he wants with little regard for u. if anything, deadfire is digging its heels in against tide. regardless of many longform articles, i feel the prevailing view is 'games as service' not 'games as art' - esp among western rpg and mmo fans. weirdly enough, i feel action gamers more likely to discuss games as art form. From software, drakengard, metal gear solid and zelda fans all good examples. uve also got the audience for all those stylised/cinematic side-scroller things that trace back to 'another world'. western rpgs, not so much. theyre more likely to be discussed as systems that break - or contracts between dev and player that go unfulfilled.

Forbidden fist. Sounds like a fun - if tiring - weekend.

Pathfinders travel is fun. It reminds me of Star Trail and i loved that game. Tbh id take any kind of world map over the absurdity of dos2 where every person and object of world-shaking importance is within a 200 yard radius. Maybe lower the stakes of ur campaign if thats how ur gonna roll, lads?

Is perhpas notable that batty is hardly a charcter in the original text. Ive actually got some time for deadfires structure, but id rather keep my powder dry re that until ive played thru everything + the dlcs. I think the main problem i have re the writing is that is hard to shake the sense of peeps - in a locked room - second guessing themselves into a gordian knot. I actually think it would have lent a bit of clarity or force had they just rode the lightning a bit more, or brought in an outside editor rather than stewed in their own self-criticism. Like i vaguely remember reports of them carving chunks of text out of the critical path. Eh, maybe they did that for good reason, but starting from assumption that u have to apologise in advance for ur left-field narrative not a productive thing imo. Like, whatever u think of him, MCA shows tendency to do his own fking thing and peeps can complain if they want. Sometimes folk do, obviously, but i think theres something to be said for that bullheadedness. Deadfire does do a lot of interesting stuff. I like idea that ur mainly there to bear witness to conflict and revolution. U r the watcher after all. Puts u in slightly odd position at end as now u potentially one of only five people who can explain roughly what eothas did and why. Good opportunity to make **** up and set urself up as a false prophet if so inclined lol. Kneel b4 the inquisitor of eothas or he will return and drink moar souls.

If the series had just been sci fi showtime throughout, id maybe have rolled with that explanation. But ME2 had serious bags under its eyes. It wasnt highbrow stuff, but it was conveying life in the wilderness as much as a mission to save the universe. For me, it was the gung-ho turn of ME3 that felt like a bait-and-switch, while the ending felt like that old darkness reasserting itself. Shep alone, body broken, losing everything for a second time. Mostly, ME3 felt like a list of cameos and resolutions of every single plot thread from the previous 2 games. I felt u could see straight through the game to the excel spreadsheet. it had all the emotional heft of an outlook schedule. At least the end felt like it was made by a dangerously sleep-deprived human and not a machine calculating what it thought folk wanted. The exhaustion and disconnect were palpable. I was honestly relieved to feel *something* from the game other than a desire to please and make a good product. It reminded me of the jarring end of Another World where Chahi's storyboard just folded under the weight of his project. I didnt even bother getting the citadel dlc. I didnt want my memory of the old jagged alliance replaced by a lads night out. But hey-ho. peeps wanted different things from the series. And there were more of them than me. Story of my life, lol. EDIT: i missed out the word 'more'. Typing on phone hard.

Im gonna be that guy. I liked ME3's ending more than i did the rest of the game, it sharpened everything to a point, left u alone, went massively abstract and obliterated everything. Honestly, i prefer that over all the pandering-victory-lap nonsense thats everywhere these days, and covered 90% of ME3 like a rash. If anything it should have gone more nonsensical and evangelioned one off imo.

If TC goes stellar with this immediately after FO tanks i might have to start believing in karma or some such.

Lol this looks quality. Fk i havent done all this cut and paste **** since NWN2.

Thank God someone mentioned Shining Force III. I sometimes feel im the only person who knows that series. SFIII was *huge*. The whole campaign is prob in the region of 120 hours, no lie. It's evidence that you can stretch out the simplest ruleset with clever encounter design. U could explain SFIII's mechanics in about a paragraph. I personally favour it over Final Fantasy Tactics, but then I'm not a fan of the Ivalice setting. Way too ponderous. SFIII rattles on with the momentum of an 80s kids TV show. Yknow, one of those ambitious ones like Jayce and the wheeled warriors. For those partial to JRPGs and willing to muck about with emulators and translation patches, check it out. It's one of the forgotten greats worthy of that name.

Ye ive already specced her into thug, with the traditional 1 lv of vivisectionist for mutagen + sneak attack. I imagine she scales okay. Fighters normally do just bcs of feat glut. Her conflict aint limited to 12 yr olds. If anything id say its more of a stereotypical quarter/midlife crisis thing. U resent being put in a box but in the transition to life outside it u always lose something - and sometimes its not what u predict. U see people go through that at every age. Her flavour of dysmorphia is something that skews younger - the ageing process can do wonderful things for feminine visbility - but sometimes these things just dont wreak havoc until the persons autonomous enough to make substantial life decisions based on it.

Tangent, re: Sirin. Wasnt it Robert Land who wrote her? Thats a name that doesnt get mentioned v often, even its often in the margins. Potential dark horse maybe? I wonder if hes likely to contribute much to his husbando's secret project? Its hard to tell really, sometimes spouses prefer to keep their professional lives separate to maintain marital harmony - eh pointless me speculating tbh. Just wondering what we might see next from the dude.

I find it hard to object to Kana. Hes just a chatty graduate on his gap year, and one who embodies the positives of that stereotype. He's brave, open-minded and resilient. Even if those traits are born from privilege theyre still nice to be around. As a companion, i feel he adds a lot to the game simply bcs he pipes up frequently and has a good stat spread. Hes colourful and weightless. I dunno if valeries exeuction's entirely great, but i like the concept - feminine ideal who despises and rebels against her biology/destiny. Shes a similar beast to pallegina. Think main difference is pallegina doesnt let herself be vulnerable while valerie has a romance arc that i havent investigated. I dont think i want to tbh. Lets just say if i were writing that character id shy away from attempting it. For the same reason i think naotos romance arc from P4 was Not Clever. Idea of romance 'fixing' someones self-concept not appealing at all imo. Maybe valeries romance arc nothing like that but i cant imagine it adding much even if it doesnt take away. But other than that, valeries big problem is that her mechanical setup is bad. She cant take paladin levels, she cant take combat expertise, she hasnt got the wisdom to make really good use of inquisitor, which hobbles any attempt to send her down the intimidate route. Her DEX isnt good enough to take advantage of armour training. A lot of wasted potential there. Like none of this would be a problem if kingmaker didnt insist u know ****, but it does.

Aaah ye id forgotten about rorschach. I dont think hed have much time for skaens class consciousness - which is one of the things that really sets skaen apart - but theyre not wholly different. Think rorschach would worship woedica over skaen, if thats a remotely productive thing to contemplate, lol. Inb4 watchmen/pillars crossover.

I dunno about the witcher. I know all roads lead back to ultima but i feel pillars true genesis was the dnd goldbox era. Ultima kind of ended up digging its own weird little trench largely divorced from everything else around it, though I see a fair of bit of Ultima 7's influence about, esp in OG fallout, Arcanum, BG1+2 and Gothic. Not too long ago, i played the early ultimas again for old times sake. Its really shocking how *weird* that series could be. Like, many of the old RPGs were highly eccentric one way or another - Wizardry, Might and Magic in particular - but i dont think there was anything quite as odd as ultimas blend. U went into space and visited cities called 'Paws' from day one. There was a dude called 'Lord British'. The avatar and their mates existed for generations bcs why not. Then u mixed into this whimsy all that highminded virtue stuff. I feel D:OS has got a noticeable streak of ultima in its hair. The divinity series as a whole might have inherited its occasionally jarring tone from ultima.

I guess theres an argument to be made that woedica and skaen are twin aspects of punishment - one representing punishment from authority, the other, punishment from below. The thing i find curious about skaen is that hes the kind of god i could see having traction IRL. I feel anyone whos lugged pallets on a casual contract, kept their mouth shut out of fear and dreamt about justice could imagine worshipping him. Credit to obs. Hes a divine archetype that seems incredibly obvious now hes been created, but before it wasnt widespread. Most revenge oriented gods are either lavey-esque sensualists or cold mercykiller types. I suppose hes kind of a divine version of characters like De Flores from the Changeling or Caliban from The Tempest. Id already mentioned Steerpike elsewhere. My mythology's not quite up to scratch re: finding an true equivalent. There have always been resentful trickster gods and hateful servants but im struggling to recall something that combines the two.

ME1's not bad to play at all. It gets more fun the harder it gets and gives u gameplay incentive to mix and match ur team. ME2 brutally streamlined the gameplay in favour of better set pieces and more self-contained stories. That's not normally something I'd approve of - but ME2 knew what it wanted to be, did so without apology and made the most of its change of direction. For me, there are three reasons that set ME2 apart. Well - one big reason and two smaller reasons. 1st simple reason - The rush of personal missions and side quests greatly expand the universe. 2nd reason - The game has a controlling emotion at its core: loneliness. Ur thrown out of ur old life and have to operate outside the system. U lose all ur old friends - with two surprising exceptions. The meat of the game has u putting together a team of people who are also misfits and trying to help them find a place. Ur not just rebuilding ur life, ur rebuilding ur village, so to speak. Being thrown out into the cold world and striving to find ur place is an almost universal experience, and its a common theme in a lot of YA literature. As a more casual game, ME2's positioned well to capture that audience. The final reason is that the gameplay's streamlined to pump all this directly into ur veins. ME2's aware of its core strength and plays to it. The first game was perfectly fine. Ye, some aspects were a bit wonky and underdeveloped but not fatally so. The story was fun 'you are cassandra saving the universe stuff'. It did a good job establishing its IP. There wasnt much going on under the surface but that might have been for the best. It gave the writers a foundation to be more ambitious the second time around. ME3 came with two fatal problems. The theme of loneliness and rebuilding was gone. Instead, u were saving the world from inside the system. The other issue was that it started *contracting* the universe, undoing ME2's heavy lifting in that department. Scene-setting conflicts were resolved left, right and centre. The genophage, the homeless quarians, the geth. Planets were ripped asunder in the universe's equivalent of the faerun spellplague. The games chaotic and corporate hubs of omega and illium were either inacessible or fulfilled a different function. I feel this raises a structural problem with trilogies. If the second part fulfils its expansive brief too well, the last act's resolution can seem like endless destruction. Personally Id have rather seen ME3 leave its worldbuilding largely intact and plunge into cosmic horror territory. Leave the main stage and confront the reapers in the metaphorical (or literal) void with a greatly reduced cast. But thats just me. I doubt many people would have wanted that. Dont think anyone ever made bank pandering to my formal preoccupations. It's almost an afterthought, but ME3's gameplay is a notably improved version of ME2's. Still streamlined, but more kinetic and with more room for player expression. But ye, thats my take on Mass Effect in general, if anyone remotely cares. I wont go on about andromeda. That game took on too much responsibility combined with wonky presentation and curbed resources. Rip. A shame, the best parts of it were quite absorbing and i liked it more than DA:I, at least.