Karranthain

That's unfortunate, thanks for the quotes.

Can you describe it a bit? Why do you feel it would be beyond the scope of PE? New mechanics were introduced into the game (recruiting troops, solving problems, financing various improvements), it was also central to the storyline.

I hope that's not the case, that'd be pretty disappointing (at least for me).

I liked the NWN2 fortress, but I'm guessing the scope of it is too large for this project. BG2 strongholds are the next best thing, so there goes my vote.

Could Onyx be a stretch goal, would that be feasible? Or perhaps way too costly to even consider that? Though I guess this stance is most sensible.

I'm fairly sure I Yeah, I distinctly remember that, but can't find the relevant interview. But it seems they have a surprise for us, interesting.

When thinking of adventuring traps immediately come to mind. I'd love it if one class, say a ranger (if it's in the game, that is), could plant them too.

Stamina would probably the best way to go about it. If it isn't implemented in the game, the old-fashioned dexterity (and possibly perception) and to-hit penalties. Not being able to use a shield in full plate (as you've suggested) is another. In any case, full plate shouldn't be "the armour to end all armours". It should have its niche.

I approve of your ideas and wish to subscribe to your news letter. How about some weapon related feats as well? Spend a skill point or whatever and certain axes/pole-arms could have a "hooking" effect, allowing you to temporarily negate the enemy's shield or parry? I'll be exapanding that topic soon, that's a good idea One way to do that would be to open up new attacks with increased weapon proficiency (or just making them harder to perform without it).

Yeah, after all it's the whole point of roleplaying games - roleplaying a certain character. That's where stats come in.

I was thinking it would be pretty nice if major characters in the game (including the companions) had a small narrated sequence of their own, which would describe them in a few sentences (while their portrait would be displayed in the background).

Sorry, not a fan. They do have that 80s' charm though

Some ideas here : http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/60205-weapon-mechanics/#entry1190501

Definitely. Eternity will be using 2D backgrounds as well, which I find great. Some examples from other games :

I'll add some of my favourites as well : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6LO1ZSzdmQ&feature=relmfu http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmCwz9zf01I&feature=relmfu

No minigames please. Unless, it's something like Arcomage in Might & Magic, I suppose. But still probably a waste of resources.

Just about anything is a drain on the resources. So if we could have, for an instance, a more complex character system, or maybe more quests, I'm in favour of skipping romances.

Quite true, and that should be taken account in world building, I agree. However there is much more the the aesthetics of a culture than the basic weapon and armor designs. I'm saying that just because you have guns does not necessarily mean you also have powdered wigs, clothes with frills, and a dueling culture. If you enjoy renaissance or age of sail aesthetics then it's simply a matter of preference, of course. Fair enough, that makes sense.

That's because weapon advances generally influenced the armour design as well. It simply makes sense. That said, I'm not heavily against that. It can work, case in point : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9VqO-sbphE I think it's a very interesting aesthetic

Because it'd would give them a unique and consistent look. Different cultures with varrying aesthetics provide a more interesting gameworld, I feel.

While you're at it, let's bring back item sketches as well :

The culture that has developed firearms could use that aesthetic.

Adding multiplayer is more work that it would seem. I feel that their resources would be better spent developing the singleplayer portion of the game.