Nonek

Why would anyone prank call a woman who'd just been rushed into hospital for pregnancy complications in the first place? Whether a celebrity or not, that seems to be an extremely tasteless and quite frankly stupid thing to do. Hopefully if the young lady recieves a payout of some sort, then the dead nurses family can then sue her for their emotional and financial distress.

The thing is, conversation and argument is not a challenge. Not in the same way a combat encounter is, anyway. There are roleplaying systems that try to turn it into one through more complicated social interaction mechanics, but in my experience they don't really work out all that well. The problem is "how do we make conversation just as engaging as combat" is a wrong question. Believe it or not, this mindset is very much the mainstream one: Experimental games that defy it like Proteus or Dear Esther get shouted down by CoD-ites and Grognards alike, and it's part of the problem. Insisting that the feeling of overcoming a challenge and winning is the only thing that makes a game worth playing is like insisting power metal is the only type of music worth listening to: Power metal is great, but by refusing to even consider anything else you're shutting yourself off from an entire galaxy of possibilities. I totally disagree, conversation can be a challenge. Asking the right questions at the right time, doing ones research on the subject, uncovering secrets that pertain to the situation, performing deeds that sway the other party, etcetera. All of these can easily be implemented, rather just arbitrarily dismiss whole portions of the game because a single individual chooses not to like them. The dialogue battles of Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Alpha Protocol and many old school rpg's spring to mind, where numerous variables are taken onto account not just a story being told rather than shown. As for my mindset being the mainstream one, I once again respectfully disagree. Dear Esther isn't a game, it has no interactive opportunities, it simply offers an experience and it will not change despite anything you do. Feature stripping and content deprivation is not innovative, it's been occuring for the past twenty years, and these virtual picture books are the very nadir of that steady decline in quality and interactivity. They are not innovative, because they have no features. There are no possibilities explored in them, just the same story told to every player. To embrace them is to harm the medium, and excuse the developers from creating anything with complexity, choice, consequence or creativity. Sorry to sound so passionate on the subject, but I do not want any aspect of these graphical picture books to taint this kickstarter. The whole industry is moving towards these streamlined "emotional" games, obviously because there's miuch less work involved in making them, but Project Eternity was pitched as an escape from this modern fascination with accessibility and simplification. The milky way is still out there, not watching Dear Esther play itself will not make it disappear.

No.

A long, long time ago, I can still remember how that mechanic used to make me smile. And I knew that if I had the chance, my armour and sword I would enhance, and maybe i'd be more effective for a while. But Update #58 made me shiver, with the butthurt it delivered. Bearded on their doorstep, Obsidian feared a misstep. I can't remember if I cried, when I read about craftings wounded pride. Something touched me deep inside, the day that durability died. So bye-bye rusty chainmail clad guy. Oil and polish your plate armour, there's no need it can't die. And leather can survive a blast furnace and not fry. Because durabilities got to die. Yeah durabilities got to die.

True, does sound a bit preachy on second glance. Please feel free to dismiss or dissect as one wishes.

In general i'm against an equivalency of inventory. obviously I do not want my items to be sub par, but so long as they are thematically correct for my character and beneficial to my playstyle then i'm not particularly upset if I have not chosen an optimal configuration. My character should be the potent force, not his inventory. It's always seemed a little too gamey to have a wide range of every available configuration catered for, regardless of local culture, history or any other factor.

I will probably make a couple of demonstration characters, just to serve as an introduction to character creation, the mechanics and the advancement route that appeals to me then restart on hard, with trial of iron and expert mode enabled, as well as toggling a few other features to my personal preferences.

I think the point of a game is to engage the player. Challenges are one way to engage a player but they aren't the *only* way, and I've honestly never played an RPG that manages to do this successfully in any way deeper than simple skinner box mechanics. Personally, my best experiences with RPGs aren't the parts where the DM decides to "challenge" me with a difficult combat encounter, they're the parts where I interact with the characters and the world. Interacting with characters and the world should be one of the harshest challenges presented to the player, if the GM is worth his salt. Changing minds, whether through logical discourse, the presentation of proof or a simple recitation of ones deeds is fine, but i'm afraid to say that I know from past experience that people are not always logical and do not wish to hear the truth. Overcoming an antagonist through the demonstration of a superior philosophy, and highlighting the flaws in his beliefs is a challenge and always should be. If i'm handed these victories then they are cheap and meaningless, I wish to prove myself and stretch my intellect not be a passive observer. Background detail is fine and hopefully if logical adds to the depth of the setting and its players, but that can in no way be considered a game to me. Skyrim is a beautiful landscape, with a rich abundant ecosystem, the benefit of decades of lore behind it and a painstaking attention to detail, but it's not interactive or challenging. The world does not respond to my actions in any meaningful way, and thus whatever headcannon I choose to foist upon the game and the reasoning behind my characters deeds and decisions is pointless. I am not challenged because I have no reward, there is no accomplishment and no achievement to be gained. If I wish to be engaged by the characters and the world, then I can read of them easily enough, I am and always will be a fan of the written word. In a game however I expect challenge, interactivity, reactivity and acknowledgement of my actions. This is the strength of this particular medium in my eyes, and shouldn't be abandoned in favour of faux emotional engagement. Certainly not in Eternity's case, which was Kickstarted with the aim of bringing back the more challenging, content and feature rich games of the past, rather than settling for the streamlined and illogical games of the present, that are touted as being innovative while catering to the most degenerate of players who want simplification to the point of the game playing itself. The mainstream market provides an outlet for these players needs, and there is no need to force these hideous practises upon one of the few sparks of complexity and interactivity that remains in the genre.

I've never minded a bit of a challenge, a soupcon of strategic planning, and a touch of trial and error, mainly because ultimately for me thay lead to a greater sense of accomplishment when I succeed. If everything is handed to me, as i'm finding is all too prevalant in most modern games, then I grow bored and uninspired. What is the point of a game but to challenge the player after all, through learning its systems, adapting oneself and mastering them. A well crafted and logical narrative is important to me, but not so important as to overlook the gameplay aspect of the experience. I suppose in prioritising accessibility many developers have overlooked achievement, and unknowingly begun to starve those who are seeking a touch more meatier fare for their palette.

The Vaillian free companies are rightly considered to be some of the finest soldiery in the known world, and pre-eminent amongst them is the Meridian company, who march under the banner of the sunburst. It is a little known fact that in the baggage train of the Meridians there will always be a wagon full of Vaillian sunfruits, these sweet delicacies are in point of fact what gave the company its name, and each man has a ration of fruit issued to him with every meal. Not only do the sunfruits keep the company healthy and fit, their juice is smeared on the hands before battle to firm the soldiers grip, and on his brow to prevent sweat dripping into his eyes. A small thing, but with dysentry and sickness incapacitating many a free company during campaigning season, the Meridians have managed to maintain a fit and dependable fighting force that is quickly forging a legend for itself.

Rations - Hearty vittles, perfect for sustaining the weary traveller. Salted meat and dried fruit baked into a crusty loaf of bread, a skin of small beer to wash it down with. Has no particular benefit. Orlan Dreamgrass - When the Orlan wish to while away a quiet afternoon they'll stuff their pipes with this narcotic leaf and drift away. For a Cipher the effect is far more severe, his abilities will be boosted and his acuity sharpened for a good few hours, however a certain lethargy will overtake his limbs draining his stamina. A single stalk placed under his tongue is all he needs for the Dreamgrass to take affect. May be habit forming. Glenfathan Porridge - Made with oats harvested from the graves of their fallen warriors, the Glenfathan hold that consumption of this porridge is a sacred duty, and it not only honours the loss of their fallen but lends one a measure of their strength. Certainly it has done no harm for their legendary berserkers health. Consumption of the porridge will grant a small bonus to health for a few hours, even more if the oats have been mixed with ox blood rather than milk or water. Vaillian Sweetmeats - A delicacy of growing popularity in the Dyrwood, the recipe of which is unknown to any but the Vaillians. Grants a rush of increased stamina for an hour or so as the body absorbs the sugary goodness. Trailcakes - Rangers and Druids of the Dyrwood swear by these little pastries when undertaking a hard journey, they boost stamina for a good duration and enhance natural healing. However there is a downside, when the eater falls into slumber he will sleep extremely heavily and lengthily, and if disturbed will suffer for his body not recieving its needed recuperation time. Saintsblood - Wine from Aedyr, said to have been blessed by the blood of a living saint , the consumption of this vintage by any Paladin or Cleric will result in euphoric joy and a heady feeling of strength suffusing the body. No one is sure whether the many tuns of this wine were actually all blessed by the martyrs blood, or whether the church is using stimulants on its warriors. The churches dogma states it is the former, and the latter is heresy punishable by tongue pulling.

Not exactly arbitrarily in this case, given that there were good reasons for doing away with it, and given that Sawyer wasn't so confident in the mechanic himself. The original IE games didn't have durability mechanics, so it's not really even a case of feature stripping from some prior point - if anything, Eternity seems to be adding quite a bit of complexity onto the IE template. Just not this particular idea, which didn't seem to work very well. To me Baldur's Gate was a bit too streamlined, but i'd just finished a playthrough of the old Ultima collection as I remember, so it was bound to appear sparse by comparison with no enviromental interaction, npc schedules, crafting, item manipulation, teleportation, sleeping animations, consumable vittles etcetera.

Ah I may be just a bitter old man, but i've seen twenty years of feature stripping and streamlining to the point that there is no game, just a cinematic experience being shown to you rather than an interactive game to participate in. Therefore I always prefer that features should be retained and improved, rather than jettisoned arbitrarily. However I could get over the MMO aping combat mechanics without campaigning for their change, so i'll do the same with my equipment now being impervious to all harm. I'm sure Obsidian will still make a good game.

Harumph!

My arms and armour won't degrade at all? Damn! Pardon my uncharacteristic profanity.

Or perhaps Whirling Dervish due to his multiple attacks. Indeed there's a case for re-naming a few others I believe, a rogue could be re-named as a scout or assassin reflecting their superior knowledge of weapons and armour, the fighter could be known as a soldier or legionnary to explain their meat shield rather than warrior status etcetera. Still there's a lot to be said for keeping the traditional names.

Indeed I agree, but no one reading of the Dead Marshes can escape the parallel being drawn there. I think his writing was affected by his experiences without a doubt, though obviously he was not trying to be allegorical with his noted preference for history.

Now that's what you call a Silicone Valley, boom ching. Sorry, i'll report immediately to the Sarkeesian death commandoes.

Tolkien's writings were pure escapism and not meant to be anything else, and considering his experiences in the trenches their simplicity might have been something of a coping mechanism. Personally I found his work on the sagas and various anglo saxon translations such as Beowulf, to hold far more weight than the Lord of the Rings. The Silmarillion has far more depth and nuance than the Red Book.

Happy birthday cousins.

The last day of the sale seems to be rather good value, to say the least.

Though I don't dislike the original crafting and durability mechanic personally i'd go further Infinitron, make that sharpened state achievable at blacksmiths and at campfires/rest points for the crafting skilled individual, so that we can achieve an optimal state before bearding the "big bad" of our current destination. Perhaps whetstones and repair kits may be purchased, in the hands of the unskilled they maintain items at a normal level of preparedness, but in the hands of a crafting wise character they can achieve the superior states you speak of. So before venturing into the last level of say Deathtrap Dungeon our crafter is busy at the fire patching, repairing armour and honing the groups weapons. So that they are at optimal efficiency, his own of course not needing so much attention as his skill mitigates their degeneration as in the original mechanic. Of course there must be a downside for this, so have a dull/blunt state if one wishes to not invest in crafting or repair kits and whetstones, that may be achieved if combat is regularly indulged in between trips to the blacksmiths. Off the top of my head: Durability of 00 = Dull/blunt. 01-80 = Normal performance. 80-100 = Sharpened. Thus you have twenty blows for this weapon when fully sharpened before it degrades to, eighty blows using the normal stated damage of the weapon before, the damage/to hit penalty of the dull/blunt state kicks in. Edit: Have these maintenance items be part of the top of pack mechanic, so that it is a strategic choice of how many to carry over other items perhaps? They would of course be slowly used up or worn away themselves as well.

I wonder if the objection to being massively wealthy at endgame is simply a dissonance, we are not usually treated as being so wealthy, and it does not fit in with the story being told? In NWN2 being the lord of Crossroad Keep, and maintaining the lands, it felt like we were wealthy and powerful, matching our financial status. Being fantastically wealthy in Icewind Dale seemed to work against the internal logic of the adventuring party however, these were desperate men and women, seeking their fortune on the frontier. While it would be original to play as a cash strapped desperado, with a half empty purse all game long, I don't think that it would be appropriate to what Eternity is trying to achieve. Perhaps the game needs quest and locales that only open up when certain levels of wealth are reached, thereby reflecting our hard work in loot gathering and giving us a reason to spend extravagantly or even invest in more important matters, political or ecclesiastical in nature perhaps?

I assure you i'm not trying to troll anybody sir, I freely admit I know nothing about that cartoon, I was just politely responding with what I thought would be a logical interested reaction so as to provoke discussion. Obviously my responses have raised your ire so I shall withdraw, hoping there are no hard feelings.

Personally I like item degradation, it feels intrinsically right to me, whether that be a spear thrust bursting through the rings of your mail corselet and holing your gambeson or whatever. It seems like a nice touch of added flavour for the player who likes to immerse himself both mechanically and narratively, however I can see how many players used to more streamlined modern systems simply wish to maintain a combat ready state without too much preparation. Perhaps the mechanic should be optional? What I usually spend money upon varies per game, in the infinity engine games it was without a doubt magic items. In Betrayal at Krondor it was the array of very useful miscellaneous inventory, rope, elven slippers, whetstones, armourers hammers, rations etcetera. In the Witcher it was without a doubt the books, covering monster lore, alchemical recipes, history and such. I did not need to purchase or collect dropped loot in the latter game because my inventory was limited to a realistic amount, and my weapons were superior to the common mass produced armaments of the soldiery. Edit: I'll admit i've complained about playing a virtual Croesus numerous times.