Monte Carlo

Or will have a bitter and undying vendetta against said system. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> True. Very true.

Hmmm. Personally I think classes are there to provide straight-outta-the-box archetypes to enable a player to make an easy choice concerning the type of character they are dealing with. The mage/ healer/ rogue/ healer archetypes have become so ingrianed now that classes have become part of the RPG landscape whether we like them or not (I don't, to be honest). Third Edition D&D tried to (quite elegantly) square this circle by satisfying the demand for classes with a more lateral skills and multi-classing system. Still, I prefer class-less systems (SPECIAL is great; would work perfectly well in a fantasy CRPG...the otherwise dreadful Lionheart gave us a glimpse how). So, to answer your questions: 1. The purpose of classes is to feed the default assumption on the behalf of the player that there will be classes. 2. There should be as many character-build options as the wider game can realistically and viably support....if it is a combat heavy game why be able to build a pacifist healer savant who won't make it out of the first level? What would be the point of having an omni-skilled brute warrior in a game like Planescape? Cheers MC

My other main problem with NWN mods is that everything in NWN looks the same. The tilesets, the music, the blocky, comedy-attired characters..... If it had shipped with some different stylistic templates for clothing, tilesets and so on (i.e. high fantasy, gothic fantasy, ancient-themed greco-roman inspired fantasy or whatever, and you could mix and match them) then it wouldn't be so tedious to look at. Don't get me wrong, I have almost enjoyed some NWN user-created mods. But, in the round, does it make the whole bundle worth investing in primarily for a single-player CRPG experience? Utterly, irrevocably NOT. Cheers MC

There are, in my experience, roughly four camps of pen & paper gamers: 1. Free-style story-tellers These guys have been at it for so long, and enjoy the story-telling, creative aspect of RP'ing so much that they, somewhere along the line, simply ditched the rules. They would be playing Fudge or some other open-ended, rules-lite system that allows them to concentrate on story-telling. For these people there is little or no point in even bothering to buy rules supplements and the like; they don't need them. These people are pretty hard-core and make up a small minority of RP'ers. 2. Vanilla RPG'ers Vanilla might not do these guys justice, and it is a bit of a generalization, but most gamers fall into this middle category. They enjoy rules (but not too much) and they enjoy role-lpaying (but not at the expense of having fun). They might be veterans, they might be munchkins or they might even be once-every-three-months for old times sake gamers. What they have in common is a sense of balance; give 'em too many rules and iterations of a system and they might abandon them. They can be fairly discriminating in what they buy, too, and are leery of constant errata/ splatbook-itis. 3. Collector-Savants The collector-savant might not even game that much. He just loves collecting books, supplements and rulesets. He is a significant part of the RPG firmament, and publishers rely heavily on this guy and his expensive splatbook habit. When he games, he is a pain because he'll want to be able to use all the wacky/ munchkin optional rules from the Essential Arcane Folio of Greyhawkian Pasta Recipes or whatever. 4. Grognard Wargamers I happily admit to being part of this camp. We are a dwindling bunch of ex-military wargamer types who fell into role-playing games via the early iterations of D&D, decamping from the old SPi, hex-based wargames, or Squad Leader. Grognards love rules, realism and pedantry. A Grognard/ Collector-Savant multi-class is one of the most terrifying beasts ever to stalk the gaming jungle. Grognard Wargamers and Free-style storytellers do not, as a rule, mix. The Grognard will defend 1E AD&D, RuneQuest, Busdhido, Traveller and other old-skool RPGs. --- So, to answer the question, what kind of gamer you are will probably dictate what kind of ruleset you like. Beauty of it is, whatever you are, the hobby will almost certainly accommodate your tastes. Cheers MC

I remember playing the original Gauntlet arcade game with friends in a pub. We'd spend as much on Gauntlet as we did on beer; that was the genius thing about it as you could feed the sucka coins and keep on playing the original game. It was great fun.... Defender with swords, really. I'd definitely consider an Xbox version for the co-op with friends, but not really for single player. For me, a co-op/ multiplayer game doesn't need to be remotely complex to be fun. OTOH, I like really complex single player games. Cheers MC

My favourite Troika moment was when, in an interview post-release of ToEE, St. Timmy blamed many of the bugs on the inability of technology to keep up with the complexity and vision of his design ideas. Ha ha ha. How many years did they surf on the credibility of the original Fallout without producing anything genuinely outstanding afterwards? The miracle is that Troika stayed afloat as long as it did. Cheers MC

Only a few of the suggestions here span the required timescale for a full TW game. By comparison, the English Civil War is a mere blip. Or a fraction of a blip. A blipette, even.

You can make the sexiest game in the world (not that they did), but if it doesn't run properly and is full of bugs people won't buy it. St. Timmy is a great lead designer, but he ain't cut out for business, is he? Troika didn't make a single game I finished or enjoyed so...meh. Cheers MC

Medieval's graphics are workmanlike but basic compared to Rome's. Nonetheless, the gameplay is extremely enjoyable with an excellent variety of factions and units. The Papacy replaces The Senate and there are Crusades and Jihads available to the respective factions to use as a strategic tool. There is also much less micromanagement of settlements but you can give your faction generals titles that boost their stats (i.e. Archbishop of Canterbury or Chancellor). Strategic marriages between your daughters and other factions are another feature that add to the Medieval flavour. The game map is beautiful, albeit less "realistic" as than the detailed terrain of the Rome:TW equivalent. It looks much more like a stylized game of Risk. And, as with all CA titles the music and VO is brilliant. Sean Pertwee does the Christian faction voices, and the battle music for the Muslim factions is genius. As good as Rome's. The idea of playing Medieval in the Rome engine is sublime....if only. To answer the question: I'm biased but I don't think that for the discerning gamer Medieval is a "step back" if you enjoyed Rome. Saying that, Rome's battle graphics are breathtakingly good. Cheers MC

Emerald Beach is a short distance (south-ish) from La Jolla. It was a long time ago, perhaps it's a bit less dull now. Everybody was driving beat-up VWs with those strange vinyl things strapped to the front of the bonnet.

This is an excellent question, and well worthy of discussion. I am a tremendous fan of Total War. Personally, I'm quite leery of what the CA might do next. After all, they've made three excellent games using the TW format.... and history teaches us that developers love dry-humping a winning format and/ or engine to death (the Infinity Engine springs to mind). The Rome engine is superlative, especially concerning detail/ gameplay versus system requirements. There is easily a hefty XP there waiting to be exploited. I've been watching Time Commanders on the TV (the TW engine is used in a gameshow format where teams play out famous historical battles) which gives us a clue as to where an XP might go. Either a prequel (Alexander springs immediately to mind, the re-skinned Companion Cavalry on the TV programme are especially cool) or an early Byzantine/ pre-Dark Ages theme seem to only viable ways to go. Personally, as for TWIV I'm a bit nonplussed. A WW1/WW2 game? Hmmm. Would fast-paced combat with artillery, tanks and firearms suit the format? Would the relatively short timespan work without the game turning into a Sid Meier style effort with a cool combat engine attached? The market is flooded with those type of RTS games. Another tempting avenue might be fantasy...but that would alienate the grognard fanbase who dig the historical aspect of it as well as being a bit, well.....cheesy. Therefore this is genuinely a really tough question. The TW format relies on that blend of turn-based strategy/ empire building and the fast-paced tactical excitement of the battles. Perhaps a period covering the 1600's to the Napoleonic era to the rise of the great European powers before WW1? The Imperial aspect means that you'd move the map to Africa and India (cool) or even to America for a civil war theme. Imagine playing a Neocon George Washington who decides to invade Europe in the early 1800's! The combination of old-school warfare (cavalry, pikemen etc) giving way to muskets and cannon and so on would be neat. A new, politically-based faction system that represents the different types of government would be cool too. So, as a starter for ten, I'd say Empires: Total War. You can play as one of the great European powers or even as a fledgling America with the Pilgrim Fathers (imagine landing your auxiliary Native American horse archers in Wales or Scotland) and follows world history through the rise of Imperialism (British Recoat infantry duking it out with Russian lancers on the plains of Southern Africa, or US Minutemen skirmishers plinking away at French Imperial Cavalry in the Crimea) through to the mechanised slaughter of 1914-1918? Whatever happens, I think a Rome:TW XP is next, and that'll do me for a while. Cheers MC

Obviously my sabbatical from these forums meant that I was unaware that people who actually liked NWN had arrived. TANSTAAFL lets the cat out of the bag though: he's a builder. Builder's love NWN. It lets them create stuff and tinker with a coded version of Lego to their heart's content. Great. I'm a player. There's a difference, and trust me from a player's perspective, NWN is a huge, steaming, festering, overrated terrine of horse merde. So, if you like making mods you'll enjoy NWN. Perversely, if you like playing CRPGs, chances are you won't. Lastly, what the buggery has Blizzard's record as a developer got to do with whether Diablo was fun or not? Cheers MC

I lived in San Diego for a while, on Emerald Beach. TBH, it was rather dull. The weather's great, but that's about it. I much prefer San Francisco. Full of Volvo-driving communists, of course, but hey. Cheers MC

:: Spits coffee all over keyboard :: Hey, put down that crack pipe! NWN is a blocky 3D version of Diablo but not half as much fun. Challenging? My arse. Now I know you're trolling, or alternatively you are also freebasing on crystal meth. My six year old nephew could write a less hackneyed and predictable plot. The second expansion. And it isn't a masterpiece but it is a tremedous improvement on the dreck that went before it. Cheers MC

If the Infinity Engine does search for optimal party stats regarding dialogue choices then it's broken. EXAMPLE: Talk to the Spectator Beholder in the undersea city. High Wisdom characters can persuade him to give up the plot item he guards and lower ones cannot. I tried it with my average INT & WIS player character and failed. I tried it with Jaheira (with only a slightly above average 14 Wisdom) and succeeded. It's fairly consistent, seeing as I've played through that area with a variety of different party builds about a dozen times. As for stores, well you will definitely get completely different prices if you don't put your highest charisma-boosted character up as initiating dialogue. Cheers MC

For optimum stability, patch it and then Baldurdash it. Both can be found courtesy of Pocket Plane Group, along with lots of pretty cool mods. Click here. Cheers MC

I played KotOR on my X-Box. I gave up after about four hours out of sheer boredom. I'd bought Full Spectrum Warrior the same day, and had much more fun with it. A top ten? Sure, I'll bite. However, my top ten are in no particular order.... from time to time I've probably been equally addicted to the following games: Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 2/ Throne of Bhaal Medieval: Total War/ Viking Invasion Rome: Total War (current addiction Numero Uno) Jagged Alliance 2 X-Com 2 Icewind Dale Command & Conquer (the original) Doom 2 (only FPS I've ever really gotten into) Warriors of the Eternal Sun (D&D on the Sega Megadrive) --- Cheers MC

I liked IWD2, a decent B+ in my book. IWD was great, but Heart of Winter? Horrible. Cheers MC

Yeah. Jagged Alliance 2. The graphics are very dated but the gameplay is excellent. In a similar vein (I'll get chewed up for saying this) Fallout: Tactics is actually a blast, although it isn't a RPG. Personally, I'd go for BG2 and the expansion but I'd also go for the not very easy but very rewarding option of modding the heck out of it for your very first run through. If you ever decide this route I will suggest which mods to instal, how, why and where to get them. As for Planescape..... meh. As somebody else pointed out it's an interactive novel about quasi-spiritual navel-gazing. Cheers MC

I'm intrigued. If you were attacked by wondering monsters, presumably you'd get a distraction bonus. Depending, of course, what they were wondering about. For example, an orc wondering about what he was having for lunch might only attract a -1 distraction penalty on his attack roll. OTOH, let us imagine an evil fighter henchman seriously wondering about why that ugly barbarian has been promoted above him by his evil wizard boss might get a whopping -4. The possibilities are endless. If I were Evil Dungeon Overlord I'd put up notices to warn monsters not to wonder whilst on patrol. Lastly, gelatinous cubes and rust monsters aren't smart enough to wonder about anything much and do not attract a distraction penalty. Cheers MC

A quick addendum: 1. It's the US Marines, not the army helping the developers. My bad. Mind you, it puts Full Metal Jacket into perspective: Joker....you're posted to the 125th Combat Gaming Simulation Battalion. 2. Having viewed the links all I can say is that this is disgraceful. I'm a huge fan of the original Close Combat games, and raping the name like this is..... just wrong. I won't be touchnig the game with the proverbial bargepole. Cheers MC

I think the US Army Games Liaison Unit needs to go and get some in-country time in the Middle East. If I were a grunt dodging RPG fire in some godforsaken third world hellhole I'd be wondering how I'd qualify to become an army games advisor, sat in a software suite in CA drinking pepsi and putting in some serious time on the GI issue mouse. Saying that, FSW was fun, so it isn't a complete waste of US taxpayer's money. Cheers MC

I'll have to drag up the topic of RuneQuest again. Used a quasi-mana system based on a character stat called Power (POW). You lost a POW point every time you cast a spell....but you could boost the power of a spell. Say your character knows Healing 3. That sucka costs 3 POW points. Your maximum power score is 18, by the way so you really have to think about what spells to cast and when. POW regenerated slowly. Also, as your POW dropped, your skill bonuses associated with high POW dropped too. It was basically a combined mana/ endurance system but actually really easy to use (RQ worked on a d100 percentile system). As your character gets groovier he can use different totems and crystals to store a bit more POW to charge up different spells. He could also boost his base POW stat. Nonetheless, in a higher-level battle your character could very easily use up a good 75% of his stored magic. Of course, RQ was classless, level-less and every character had access to some magic. It was, however, an interesting take on the mana system and worked well, giving the player real choices about how he best deployed his magical resources and when. Cheers MC

The WotC guidelines were fairly unambiguous re. mature content. So, here we have a situation where WotC has happily ignired it's own guidelines... conclusion? WotC realised their guidelines were bunk. The guy who signed off on them is probably out of the loop now. Will this stop Wizards using their content guidelines as a capricious and wildly inconsistent blunt instrument to bludgeon CRPG developers with? [/] rhetorical question. Happy New Year. Cheers MC

No, our logic doesn't differ. You just don't deploy it in the first place. Conspiracies are do-able but really, really difficult to pull off. Watergate? BUSTED. Iran/ Contra? BUSTED. Whitewater? Well, almost busted. I guess, when you get a job, a real life and a sense of perspective you'll notice the difference between conspiracy and people making bad decisions in tough circumstances. Cheers MC