FlintlockJazz

I'm going to say no. As much as I like to see the muscles on my fighter grow and my wizards grow more wizened it is implemented too much like a case of ego stroking these days that I'd rather they didn't bother.

No.

That's a safe bet I think. Example from history - it is believed (someone may correct me if that's not the case) that Germanic mercenary cavalrymen would wear Roman masked helmets into combat, despite them being intended for sports/ritual use. They're super creepy, so I kinda get it. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/63/Roman_cavalry_reenactment_Carnuntum_2008_12.jpg Thats so cool! :D And I really get the creepy look, seeing that serene expression on someones face as they come riding at me... I do think that armour looking different on different classes would be a cool way to go. Or to tske the 'culture' armour idea people have given instead of it being 'super' hides or something they are instead still plate but adapted to a 'barbaric' style and use, perhaps emphasizing different attributes?

I.....must have this hat. I needs this hat. Where do I get that hat? It's a selfmade-hat, albeit a very easy one. Get cardboard, cut a circle out of it, also a circle where your head should be. Use felt in as many colours as you want and put it around the cardboard. Buy a lot of feathers and there you go :D Sir, that is a most awesome hat sir. I weep that such headgear is not worn nowadays.

I agree. My answer to the question quoted below is that it'd make perfect sense if said barbarian/ranger was forced to forgo using obsolete armour if circumstance demanded it. That'd make the world more believable. Exactly and it shows a sense of progression culturally as well as level wise: Thug the Barbarian, after adventuring in the Civilised lands has adapted and learnt the techniques used there rather than remaining static and unchanging. If my western character travelled to the east I would expect him to adapt to the culture there, much like how the crusaders changed their style f dress while in the Holy Land. Differing outfits help to differentiate characters though for aesthetic purposes, and as far as realism is concerned all of your party is not necessarily going to want to wear plate mail all the time. Hide armor may protect less, but I assume it would also be lighter, quieter, and more agile, easier to get in and out of, as well as less stifling depending on the climate, and less expensive for the poorer members of your party. If you are talking about real life hide armour then your assumptions would be wrong on most of those counts. As for aesthetics: that can be done without forcing people to use specific armour to 'portray' their character. A barbarian who refuses to learn and use plate armour isn't being barbaric, he's being a moron. A real barbarian would put that plate on then decorate it with the tribal wards and markings of his homeland, showing that he is not a static stereotype but an actual person capable of growing and learning, adapting what he has learnt on his travels to his own culture.

Having nonlethal options would be great but I definitely don't want a no-kill playthrough possible. Some of the nonlethal methods for taking out your main targets in Dishonored just seemed so contrived and ruined the whole assassin feel of the game and the questioning morality behind it for me that I actually refuse to take them now, instead striving to kill only my target like a surgeon at work (really hard with the Pendletons if you are going for a ghost run too). Plus, no matter how hard you try eventually one of those guards you knock out should die since it is impossible to knock someone out without the risk of complications.

I'd like the game to let us have parties in cities too. With blacjack! And hookers!

What I think for what it's worth: don't force it. You get people saying "Oh moral conumdrums!" and "Gray areas!" in the belief that it will automatically make a better story, when actually forcing it is actually the worst thing you can do. I say, do what is best for the story: sometimes cut'n'dried villains work fine, other times one with decent motives will work.

Historically, the reason why guns were used to begin with was because the training required was quite minimal when compared to archers. Archers needed to spend years training up their muscles (English and Welsh longbowman for instance were described as having quite distorted bodies due to the training regime) to become useful, and while it would be centuries before guns would do more damage and greater range this lack of entry requirements made them become widespread across Europe in no time. What does this mean about how it will work in the game? No idea, the devs may have a completely different idea to how gunpowder weapons will be implemented in their game. They may just have it one does more damage and the other fires quicker or something. Cadegund has been mentioned as to using a hammer or somesuch weapon as well, so musket may not be her primary weapon like the bow could be with Sagani.

I agree. The thing about Irenicus, and this holds true somewhat for many of the characters in BG2, is that they had some great lines. Cool soundbites, in essence, because that was often the few things that you could get across well in the IE games. In fact, I'm not entirely sure that the Irenicus in your dreams was the real Irenicus at all, I'm pretty sure it got revealed after you lose your soul that it was actually the essence of Bhaal within you trying to 're-educate' you, as it then starts to be represented by Imoen instead. Irenicus, when you think about him, was actually a whiney character who basically let his sister talk him into doing a bad thing and then cries about his punishment and tries to do the exact same thing all over again! I mean, I actually have more questions about the sanity and capability of that Elf Queen who banished him: she stripped him of his soul, then cast him loose in the world to do even more damage, does that sound like a smart thing to do? Really? Facepalm moment. The thing with BG2 was that it really was the side quests that made that game. I rush through to rescue Imoen first before doing most of the side quests but that's purely to avoid letting her get too far behind in experience, once I get out of the underdark it's all side quest baby! In fact, the last time I had a playthrough I stopped playing at the beginning of the Spellhold dungeon, simply because I could not maintain the interest any more. Part of it might be because I have done it so much, but also because I just find the side quests more interesting and are in better bite-sized pieces than the main questline. I find that, fully modded up, I enjoy BG1 more for the replayability factor since it did feel more like you were adventurers travelling the land exploring and coming across adventure. Now, I know that technically The Elder Scrolls games are pretty much all about the side quests too, but they lack the writing and dialogue found in the IE games. The creepiness of the serial killer skinning people for their skins for instance, travelling to Trademeet and doing all the quests there that, while having nothing to do with the main questline still felt like they were major plot points and having their own questlines that led to you becoming the heroes of the town!

I particularly like the Surcoat idea. Just being able to wear something like that over your armour to give yourself a specific look and to display perhaps your allegiance to certain factions would be awesome!

The use of leather in the Roman Empire is hotly contested between experts, there isn't much evidence either way and cost is unlikely to be a factor due to the cost of leather, in most cases if you couldn't afford metal armour you went without at all. As to you hazarding a guess that padded armour was only used in colder climes, you know what they say about assumption, and hazarding a guess is what the Victorian historians did and that created all the misconceptions we currently have to deal with today. Layered textiles as armour was used throughout the world in many different climes, including places like Eqypt. A jack, made out of quilted cloth in layers, and sallet were seen as the equipment of a well equipped footsoldier and appealed to many, and according to writers of the time the soldiers of the Duke of Gloucester in 1483 were equipped with them and were described as "comfortable tunics...stuffed with tow...They say that the softer the tunics the better do they withstand the blows of arrows and swords, and besides that in summer they are lighter and in winter more serviceable than iron". Lords would spend a lot of money equipping their soldiers with this armour, it was indeed useful, and were not disliked by their wearers at all.

Leather was used as armour, but not very much in Europe and it was less protective than padded cloth armours like gambesons and the like even in the countries were it was used extensively. It was used primarily in the East where animals with thick enough hide to make it worthwhile lived, in Europe the expense of making leather armour from the animals we had available (remember, cows and sheep and other domesticated animals back then were smaller due to the lack of breeding techniques, hormone enhancements and even basic nutrition) would require so many hides to be effective it would actually cost more than a full suit of mail for less protection. Honestly, I don't know why people wouldn't like to see a game where padded cloth armours are more prevalent and take the place of leather armours, since the look and feel of the game would be quite different, plus when you actually see what padded cloth looks like it's actually rather awesome:

They have said that PE will end with PC at the DnD equivalent of level 12, which indicates to me a deliberate attempt at leaving room for further growth in expansions and sequels without getting too high.

Swap cloth and leather around and swap scale and chain around and I'll go with that hierarchy.

Well, just in case I suggest you mention it again. Did I say Flying Fortress of Doom? If I didn't...Flying Fortress of Doom! With a sauna. Mage Tower! Let's be sincere here, all the greats had one. Maybe it is hackneyed, passe or maybe they were compensating for something with these towers and big explosions now and than, I dont know. It is a weird world. But I am tradisionalist like that, perhaps a conservative some would say. Anyway a Tower plz, for the Love of our Power Hungry Souls. There is this void within, that can only be filled by boiling our enemies from within or have them burst in flames and ice or petrify them by speaking ancient words followed by a handgesture. It is magical poetry in motion and sometimes I dream to do it from my balcony, with a view of VICTORY! Ahm.. PS! Who doesnt want to have a garden filled with petryfied enemies!? C'mon, their faces in agony forever preserved in stone! Now, doesnt that just make your heart feel all warm and fuzzy!? Doesnt that say awsome to you. Some prefer heads on spikes, screams of mutilated enemies from the dungeon. Yes, yes, I can understand all that, but that is for the young. Now I feel more sophisticated. To have a morning walk or afternoon tea and cookies with my friends and enjoying Art. Having some trouble expressing myself in english, but i hope you understand how i feel. Mage Tower! I would like to subscribe to your noble goal...

Sorry I can't get any publishing companies to endorse me in this, I'll need to start a Kickstarter. Fair point, I am a high risk investment. Reckon you've got enough fans to reach any of the stretch goals? Friends for free? What kind of crazy hippy idea is that?? Damn fricking hippies...

I agree. My answer to the question quoted below is that it'd make perfect sense if said barbarian/ranger was forced to forgo using obsolete armour if circumstance demanded it. That'd make the world more believable. Exactly and it shows a sense of progression culturally as well as level wise: Thug the Barbarian, after adventuring in the Civilised lands has adapted and learnt the techniques used there rather than remaining static and unchanging. If my western character travelled to the east I would expect him to adapt to the culture there, much like how the crusaders changed their style f dress while in the Holy Land.

Please no arguments about realism. A lot of design decisions are founded on gameplay and not realism. In practically all games, because fun play is more important than realism. In this game there are a few axioms that are already fixed: Your companions will have their own personality separate from you. It follows that they will not be completely under your control. Another axiom: There will be dialog choices for low charisma or low intelligence characters. It follows that not the most logical character will talk but either the one you select or simply the PC. And because of the first axiom this should be the PC. The reason that you control the PCs fighting is again simply for the "fun" aspect and has nothing to do with realism or story. Its a compromise because companions who do their own fighting are just boring to play in a party RPG. So the ability to save your game progress is somehow founded in the story? How does the story dictate that you can't shoot or look through a window? Why is there no concurrency of actions? Your speech against realism actually disproves your own point: if you are allowed to control your companions in combat because its more 'fun' then controlling them in dialogue is the same. Really though, throwing accusations of realism around like its a bad thing that automatically ruins gameplay seems like a weak argument to me, and wasn't it those who were opposed to controlling other characters in dialogue the ones citing realism to begin with?

Can I vote for more than one? Want to vote for both BG and PST...

Mo Bros! Was thinking whether to start a Movember thread or not, glad to see I'm not the only one. :D

Sorry I can't get any publishing companies to endorse me in this, I'll need to start a Kickstarter. Fair point, I am a high risk investment. Reckon you've got enough fans to reach any of the stretch goals?

They haven't said no to healing, just instant healing. My guess is that healing magic takes time to take effect and can only really be done in camp. You are pretty much using magic to alter a person's body in a delicate way, so you could say its as complicated as surgery: trying to perform what could be the equivalent of heart surgery in a combat situation just isn't going to end well.

Well, just in case I suggest you mention it again.

I'm upset that he didn't even bother to ask me to quote him a price for my friendship, just ignored me and went straight to you! My rates are not that bad..