Monte Carlo

I'm not a lawyer, but Hasbro / WotC have traditionally been very cute around their IP (and with good reason). For example, the OGL (Open Gaming Licence) always specifically excluded computer games. And the older iterations of D&D are still active IP. So if I were a Hasbro lawyer and sniffed blood in the water, I might want to do a bit of a litmus test and see how close this product sailed to the wind with regards to being a D&D-esque product to the point where there were copyright infringements. I am sure Obz has a lawyer (traditionally these issues would be managed by the publisher I suspect). Am willing to be corrected, but saying "this is just like an IE AD&D game" is like a red flag to a bull. I'd steer well clear.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and tell you where I am: My politics are unambiguously right-of-centre, but I am a trenchant social liberal (in a classical liberal sense, i.e. libertarian). I see no contradiction in being strongly Gay-rights, while at the same time despising Cultural Marxists who feel the need to shepherd everyone into the blind alley that is identity politics. Many Gay people I know broadly share this view, and the ones that don't still respect it. So for me this is an issue of tolerance. You might not approve of another person's lifestyle. In fact, you might find it repugnant. I'd defend your right to feel that way as long as it doesn't adversely impact on others. As for freedom of speech? This forum isn't private property. If you opened Troller.com you could say what you liked and I'd take up arms to defend your right to say it. But not here. This is someone else's house. In this house they are an inclusive, tolerant bunch. I daresay my politics would get short shrift at the Obsidian Christmas party. No matter, I am allowed in their house and while I'm here I will respect their inclusivity and what they want to achieve with their work. And I think this forum would be better if we all did broadly the same, whilst engaging in the time-honored snarky banter that is de rigeur on gaming fora. Peace

I hope they don't make arbitrary judgements on what is evil or not How about pouring flaming oil onto an old people's home, just for a giggle? Call me a boring, anti-relativist authoritarian but I'd call that fairly evil.

You call yourself Troller and every post seems carefully designed to fan the flames of the kulturkampf.

Newsflash. I love D&D. I played pen and paper 3E and thought it the best version of the game. In other news, I like red wine and white wine.

The answer to that is everything. The IE was designed specifically to turn the pen & paper D&D game into a computer game iteration. Implicitly and unambiguously. Everything you see in the Infinity Engine game mechanics was shaped around the requirement to emulated 2nd Ed. AD&D. For example, are you telling me that the Planescape Fans here, who are many, give a fig for THACO and six-second combat rounds and specialist mages? No. No, that's true. Many role-playing games use tropes like strength and hit points (hardly any, interestingly, use Vancian magic). Project Eternity, I suspect, will use many of these tropes. But having read the same material you have, and the same comments from developers I'm seeing something different - that is to say a commitment to making a game with mechanics more elegantly calibrated for the computer, not shoe-horned into AD&D. So the insistence that this game be a D&D clone is strange. Not to mention possibly legally hazardous from an IP perspective. Metiman is being irrational in how he frames his argument and interprets views at variance with his own. He has fixed his interpretation on a very narrow perception of what is known. So I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that if he feels so strongly about it that he doesn't waste his time.

I just re-read this. If we don't agree with your notion of Infinity Engine purity then we 'despise' the game system. Wow.

You're. Not. listening. IE was D&D. This is not D&D. Do you get it?

Hi Was reading Sawyer's interview on XP4T and liked this bit: ---- Souls appear to be central to this game --- to the magic, abilities, theme, politics... everything. It's a bit difficult to take the conversation forward on the forums, though, without any steer about what you're thinking about it. So, a very humble request, are you in a position to share a bit more? Thanks MC

@ Metiman... the elephant in the room here is Dungeons and Dragons. It's as much of a burden as it is a blessing. Take Vancian magic. It's a D&D mechanic. The designers are now unshackled from it. From my POV the whole cool-down thing is a non-issue because I simply don't see Obsidian creating a mana-burning Diablo / ARPG type mechanic for magic. They've reiterated that what they will give us will be demonstrably similar to what went before. All of us will see things that delight us, as much as we are likely to see stuff that is carved from a block of meh. Or even annoys us. If you can't live with that then don't back the project. The only thing I don't want, for example, are romances and po-faced PC tropes. That doesn't mean that I want the game to be sexist, it just means that I find cultural Marxists... boring. But some of that might wend it's way in. I'll suck it up and ignore it. Seriously, it's that simple. And if it isn't, do what the anti-firearms fundie did and just go. Cheers MC

Having thought about it for long enough not to activate flood control, I think this thread should stay open. It keeps all the crazy people contained in one thread where they can bounce around happily and stay away from other threads.

Yes, this thread is beginning to develop it's own unreality field, like a CERN run by chimps. Perhaps it will drag the entire forum into some planar loop where people's brains bleed out of their ears when they see a woman wearing armour that either (a) reveals or (b) conceals her body. Charlton Heston will then ride up a beach and see an ancient, rusting Statue of Liberty... wearing boob armour.

I wish anybody setting foot into the arena the best of luck. I might pitch in towards the end of their KS... after all some Jagged Alliance 2 designers are on it. And a fantasy version of JA2 would be pretty awesome.

His happiness gives me a warm fuzzy. Can he just take it somewhere else?

Tragic, but what does this have to do with this discussion? We could play yo momma all day on this. The fact remains that the guy went on a hissy fit based on... what? He's bitching about the lack of TB combat. Seriously? The game, from day ONE, was meant to be inspired by IE style RTwP I know that Codexians want Fallout and that they've been grinding their teeth about it for fifteen years. I know that they are too-cool-for-skool. I know that they think they are the alternative Frat House where you get to ride your motorbike up the stairs. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't call them when they spout self-righteous BS over here like they do over there. Your turn. You guys love turn-based, right?

The shipping is pretty steep by UK standards TBH.

^ Not necessarily, but I'll admit that sometimes it feels that way. Admit it, there's a lot of Codexians who actually love the fact that the games they want to play will never be made again. It's like they need the weapons-grade hate to fuel their perpetual nerd-rage. It's dull.

This. I'm at $140 for the boxed game.

OP: re. Agincourt. Rate of fire, environmental conditions and knights trapped under horses won the day. Not taking away anything from the awesome skill of English and Welsh arches armed with Yew war-bows, but more French knights died from a misericord thrust through the visor of their helms, trapped under a horse, than they did from direct arrow strikes. Many medieval weapons are in fact force multipliers, especially bows and polearms that require volume to make a tactical difference. That's difficult to recreate in a small unit computer game. To my mind the skills of the combatants is more important than who made their sword or bow.

I like the semi-conquistador fighter's garb in the top middle picture, I think it captures what I imagine the civilised bits of the P:E world might look like. My favourite are the barbarians --- although I'm getting (a good) Mad-Max gladiatorial vibe from them too. Thanks for sharing.

Please forgive the wall of text. I am a big fan of considering what went before. So the arguments about Vancian magic versus mana-based systems (and the completely understandable passion it generates) got me thinking. And, because I find myself less moved about it than some other folks, I thought that maybe I could add something new to the debate by casting my mind back to other RPGs from the Days of Yore. Of course, it should go without saying that pen and paper systems mechanically might not fit into a CRPG. But thematically... sure. Why not? Magic has always been divided into a giddying variety of types: divine versus arcane, sorcerer versus mage, cantrip versus spell, innate powa versus learnt, scroll versus memorized, generalised mage versus specialist... then you get funky stuff like bards or rangers or paladins all of whom access magic in the form of innate, modal, passive and spell-casting forms. Accessing magic is similarly broad, i.e. via using a wand, magic item or having a stack of five fire-and-forget offensive spells (all viable and powerful additions for a spellcaster). This is before we consider 3E style feats and meta-magic. Therefore pen and paper systems have always allowed spellcasters a broad range of tactics and methods to access magic. Too many perhaps, showcasing the piecemeal evolution of the hobby. So as I watch the debate unfold, it strikes me that the combatants (and I say this with respect) have perhaps not done a three-sixty and fully considered the diversity of What Went Before (WWB). Sorcerers, for example are as near-as-dammit using a mana system, the closest you'll get in an IE game. Sorcerers, by the way, are my favourite arcane spellcasting class. I often bang on about RuneQuest here, but please hear me out (read me out? Whatever). The magic there was (a) divided into two and (b) specifically rooted into the setting. There was Battle Magic and Rune Magic. Battle magic was predicated on the idea that magic was something anybody could access (classless system) if taught. It used a statistic, POWER, using a mana-type metric (boosted by items that one could store POWER in). Battle Magic consisted of buffs, minor healing and stuff. Rune Magic was the preserve of advanced cult members and was like powerful arcane magic in D&D. You could do all sorts of funky stuff with it. But the spell-list was relatively small compared to D&D but all the spells were useful. All the spells were impactive. All of the spells were fun. It was a case study in the Less Is More approach to game design. It combined hardcore, old school flavour with what would now be considered to be a mana-system, but was managed in a way that made sense --- lose POWER by casting spells and your character became physically weaker. The decision to cast spells was one made carefully. Of course, Rune Magic casters had all sorts of tricks up their sleeves to mitigate this, and this was also part of the fun. So, my conclusions 1. Old-skool Vancian magic evolved with the game to the point where there were so many options it began to undermine the whole fire-and-forget principle, creating bulky mechanics to underpin the innate clunkiness of design (meta-magic, prestige classes etc) 2. Sorcerers are almost there in terms of aping the mana model, and might be a model worth studying for this project 3. Other properly granular old-skool systems, like RuneQuest, managed to create impactive, fun, immersive magic systems using a mana-based model 4. Therefore it seems odd that the debate around a mechanic so potentially nuanced can boil down to Vancian versus Mana when there is obviously so much room to exploit in the natural gap between the two. Many thanks if you finished to read my post, and if only a handful of people Google 1st Edition Gloranthan RuneQuest after this then I'll be a happy man. Love & Peace

A serious point: until you actually see the magic system and spells within it, how can you honestly pre-judge cool-downs? I'd be crap at designing a decent spell system and mechanics, which is why I'm not a games developer. But I bet that some of the developers here are having night-time sweats thinking about getting this right. So people need to chill.

I would like a hat. Maybe a baseball cap, maybe a beanie or even a plushie viking hat with horns. All with the logo on. I also think a project eternity action figure would look nice on my desk.

You forgot trollish sexist grognards who drink too much. I feel left out.

I love the mellow music, I'm not a musical person but to my tin ear that music was pretty good and as good as any game music I've heard for a while. Having said that, I loved the kind of Gothic-Russian-Balalika-Cheese of Diablo's music. Seriously, we need bagpipes. Bagpipes are awesome.