Nonek

Well i'm not a teenager, but I can state that I don't get overthrown nearly enough!

Very useful and informative Mr Ganrich, much obliged for the time and effort spent on making these. Did anybody else think that the Dwarfs head was rather overlarge, spoiled the look of the character for me, too similar to the NWN2 model. Personally from a purely aesthetic perspective I preferred the Dragon Age Origins Dwarf, well the male one anyway.

YOU have no idea? What the **** am I supposed to do? **** hobbits? When venturing into dark and dangerous holes be sure to bring a large staff? Moira?

"The Grenadiers firmed their lines and prepared for the French advance." Ding dong.

One is not a journalist.

I hope I misunderstood you there. You are aware of the things gaming communities are capable of? Oh yes there are the strange and freakish elements such as the degenerates of the BSN and others, but even these should be respected and represented by gaming journalists as part of their mandate. They are after all supposed to represent the consumer and aid him in making an informed decision, rather than acting as PR for developers and publishers. Consider your customer to be in the right until evidence and facts countermand their position, or an artists vision negates their argument. This to me is far preferable to dismissing ones readership automatically as disgusting inhumans and bigots, preaching at them as if you are a morally unquestionable authority figure and they are simple minded plebs, or censoring any fair criticism they raise because it clashes with your sensibilities. In other words, respect and represent your audience rather than chastising and categorising them with negative stereotypes. Personally I do not worry too much about far out groups of radicals as they almost always have opposing counter groups, and thus we move to moderate and more middle of the road ground such as the ladies and gentlemen who peruse this site, where factual discourse and reasoned argument are used more than enraged rhetoric, emotional squeeing or politically correct preaching. This is only my personal opinion however, others may think as they wish.

Having previously worked in print media I do think that it is about time that the games journalism industry was held to account, especially those whom are preaching but not practising supposedly moral behaviour. I also think that it's about time that the game journalism industry started respecting its consumers, who should be considered to always be right, while standing up for a developers rights to make the product they wish to as a point of artistic integrity. I may not support what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it. At the moment it seems like they wish to enforce a currently fashionable politically correct checklist upon developers while themselves remaining corrupt, biased, ungoverned, and (sometimes literally it now seems) in bed with the developers and publishers they are supposed to be criticising objectively. Journalistic integrity is a fragile thing, if you break it now at the birth of the industry you risk your role being diminished, derided and ultimately dispensed with. With more and more people abandoning games journalism for more morally responsible, critical and detailed non professional alternatives, it is more than possible.

A simple thread for community brainstorming, suggesting possible feats or traits that allow different builds and methods of role-playing. Weak of body/Strong of mind You were born the runt of the litter, weak of body and with a Soul that was broken and shattered, and you suffered. But you would not give up, you would not die and you would not accept that only the strong deserve life. You fought against this injustice, you struggled tooth and claw to survive, against everything that life could throw at you. Your resolve became as iron, and your will was unbreakable. Effect: Might suffers a substantial penalty but all Soul powers and spells (but not physical melee and ranged attacks) gain a significant damage bonus from Resolve, allowing the classic archetype of the frail but powerful spellcaster to be built. Restriction: Can only be taken by spellcasters, Ciphers, Wizards, Druids and such.

Is it just me or is this Holorifle from Dead Money a little OP? I'm playing as a mainly melee character but this weapon is extremely potent and economical, though the small magazine size and limited scope magnification do balance this somewhat. Edit: The legendary Deathclaw went down very quickly after a few shots and a little quality time with my upgraded chainsaw.

What a wag old Winny was.

Strange that American differently abled gangs are using our rude gestures. I noticed that she has rather poor posture, but i'd hardly have thought she was crippled.

Lots of words. The idea wasn't to diminish the concept of pre-determined protagonists. I play a lot of JRPGs with those anyway. But it was simply to point out that I loathe everything about Geralt of Rivia. That's all. Oh I do apologise I took the first part of your highlighted sentence as the pertinent one, still an interesting point to discuss i'd contest.

As a polite gentleman i'll never get used to Americans blatantly sticking the rods up at people, rather rude if you ask me.

Another question for you learned ladies and gentlemen, if you don't mind: How is the culture of the Dyrwood portrayed in Dyrford? Are there phrases peculiar to the local inhabitants? Traditions and customs to be observed that leap out from the normal rpg observances? Are there any social peculiarites that are worthy of discussion? Is there a unique local manner of dressing oneself? How do the local people view foreigners such as the protagonist and their party? What is the prevailing mood of the populace with regard to national events, patriotism, worry, etcetera?

that's my favorite part actually. I don't need the game to acknowledge my character's background, I don't need the story to be personal. I hate that in games That's a valid choice but the Witcher's really not the game for you then Sorophx, like the books it's a very personal and specific experience, i'm afraid there's really no avoiding that. You play Geralt, see through his eyes and approach situations from his perspective. There are many other players, situations and political groups to flesh out the world but they play second fiddle to Geralt and his personal experiences and whichever philosophy he chooses to embrace.

I'm of two minds when it comes to defined characters versus self made ones: On the one hand pre defined characters such as Geralt have an existing personality and far more depth, we know that he is a noirish stoic individual that could step right out of a Chandler or Hammett novel, and we usually know his responses and what are reasonable choices to make on his behalf. Thus the narrative can be tailored to him and appear far more personal and impactful. However the player may not like the character as Messr's 92 and X attest, and maybe want more of their own preferable personality or traits stamped upon them. Or they may not want to play certain demographics, such as a mutated and reviled ugly freak, a male, a caucasian, a heterosexual or what have you. They may simply not like his voice actor. On the other hand there are games like Skyrim where one can create almost any character, dress them how they wish, create any backstory they wish and build a head cannon for that individual. However most of this is never acknowledged in the game, and could be done without the game even existing. Also ocassionally the story goes in a direction that your character would simply never explore, and that is when a dissonant feeling of "BUT THOU MUST" arises, and control of the character and game is taken out of your hands for the sake of the narrative and the developers story. This is especially true if a writer does not understand believable human motivations and their writing struggles to grasp basic logic or maintain internal consistency. A happy medium ground for me would be something like Torment, where one can create and mold the Nameless One as one wishes, but there are certain personal fundamentals that one cannot change. Add to this recognition of the physical side of the character, such as Omen Deng displays in Alpha Protocol when first meeting Mr Thornton, and you begin to get a game that has a narrative and a clear goal, but is substantially influenced by the protagonists choices and approach. All told the characters i've really liked have by and large been pre-defined, such as Geralt, the Avatar of Britannia, the characters of Betrayal at Krondor, the Exile, Michael Thornton etcetera. Usually the characters i've created in games have been a touch unacknowledged, had no real personality, and were not half as fleshed out as the companions. When i've finished the game or faced a choice and wondered what my character would do, i've often been stumped as they're just too nebulous and haven't really had a chance to define themselves, or are offered choices that are simply not logical, attractive or conisistent with their personality. This is especially true in save the world, get the mcguffin or deus ex machina plots, while deeply personal stories are naturally much better. I suppose one could offer choices that attracted the majority of players, whom are usually depressingly unimaginative, and create the usual prototype of a human male or female (interchangable really,) with a beautiful physical model, whom is a bad arse and yet cares deeply for their family and will react violently if they are threatened, whom uses the childish "wit" that is called snarky, is always politically correct, chaotic good and is dressed in impractical spiky armour with massively oversized weapons. However this will leech originality and any kind of individuality from the game and punish anybody whom wishes to make a more distinctive, realistic or unusual character. It's a rather labyrinthine business to be sure.

Personally I never particularly cared for Ciri in the books, too much of a Mary Sue for my liking, and i've never felt comfortable with talk of destiny and such. There's definite potential in the world and the Spiral beyond, but i'd rather the devs recharge their creative juices and give the IP a small sabbatical, so that it remains fresh and ambitious. Given the direction of Sapkowski's latest book i'd be more interested in exploring some of the other Witcher schools, a sorcerer protagonist or even a normal mortal like Roche or Iorveth.

By now one assumes that the devs are a little tired of the whole Sapkowski ouevre, i'd personally prefer their efforts be channeled into the Cyberpunk setting and the Witcher be given a little sabbatical.

Thank you and much appreciated.

If I may ask a few questions to those of you in the know: Is the game just a succession of combat encounters like the Baldur's Gates and Icewind Dales or are there more options and solutions to situations? Do the characters have backpacks or does the inventory just magically disappear as per usual? How is the gameworld, do npc's have routines and lives, vanishing at night and returning at dawn, or are they just static scenery? Why doesn't Dyrford have a stockade around it, is the area near a garrison or largely settled? What is the major career in Dyrford, is it largely agrarian, and what passtimes do the inhabitants partake in?

The Wild Hunt, i've liked the last two Witcher games immensely and so will obviously purchase the next one. Just a personal preference. I'm not really the target audience for Bioware games anymore I think, not fond of the squeeing cutesy humour, the npc caricatures, the art design which is absolutely horrible or the main theme of the game. That and I found their last game to only be tolerable, not enjoyable, with several aspects that were downright degenerate. The unhealthy focus on romance is also a little disturbing, one shouldn't cater to such people as enjoy these kinds of things, they should be institutionalised.

Dave.

It's not that bodily might represents spiritual might, it's just that they are intrinsically connected. You can still emulate that kind of character pretty well with low CON and DEX. Byt yeah, you can't get over the fact that there's only so much you can do with only six attributes, no matter how you twist them around. On the other hand, with these attributes some interesting character concepts are possible that wouldn't be possible with, say, D&D. I can't really say what bugs me about this, it just seems a little off to insist that the only people with perfect Souls are the physically strong. It just seems to be a little too Nietzschean for my moderate tastes, but i'll leave it there.

Just watched an absolutely fascinating documentary on Richard the Third, a young man with the same spinal twisting was put to the test in a re-enactment of battle in the War of the Roses. Full harness, authentic medieval wooden saddles, tilting etcetera. The chap passed most of everything with flying colours, his stamina was somewhat affected by his impediment, but he was more than able to fulfill the role otherwise.

I've got to say that one thing I don't particularly like is the fact that crippled, injured, maimed and just plain weak characters automatically have inferior Souls, because of bodily might also representing spiritual might. Just seems a little off. Edit: A waste of some interesting character concepts as well.