Merin

First of all, I've never played a game using the Vancian system where you NEEDED any spell at all. Have you? Second, half the fun of any game is discovery. You're trying to tie the 'meta gaming argument" to the vancian system, which is a bit dishonest. You don't have to *know* precisely which spells to memorize ahead of time, since in a worst case scenario if you happened to not have the absolute best spell for the situation, you can make do some other way, or take your lumps like a true adventurer and accept the fact that you won't be 100% prepared for every single encounter. I never said you needed as in actually needed specific spells. What I mean is that spells that have little use outside of specific circumstances and conditions rarely get used at all because nobody bothers memorising them in the Vancian system unless they know ahead of time that said situation will be coming up. Sure you can get by without said spell but that doesn't change the fact that said spell won't get used and rarely if ever will get used on a first play through. It's not so much about not being totally prepared that bothers me, it's that I get spells that I will never use on a first play through, they just sit in my spell book until the end of the game. What I suggest is that the spell uses per day is the same as the Vancian system, just you are not limited by what spells you have memorised. Now, I never played 3rd edition D&D but isn't this very similar to how the Sorcerer class played? I can't speak exactly on 3rd ED, but in general... yes. Sorcerers don't memorize - they have fewer spells, but they have "spell points" - or so many spells of each level they can cast per day. So if they have Magic Missile, Burning Hands and Sleep for 1st level spells and they can cast 4 1st level spells per day (4 level 1 spell points, as far as I'm concerned), they can cast 4 Magic Missiles or 4 Burning Hands or any combination of those 3 spells. Better. Not great, but better. - Another idea - spell levels are a bad idea. There are many better ideas out there, but one I'd like is picking fields or schools or some such, and you get the abilitiy to do certain things and as you get more powerful (level up) those abilities become more powerful and more diverse. 1st level mage choose fire affinitiy, for example, and therefore can create small gouts of flame. These gouts can be used to light torches, set flammable materials on fire, or cause damage to enemies a short distance away. At level 2 they do more damage, can shoot farther, and maybe some new trick. Depending on how elaborate you want to go, you might even have options as to what aspects increase as you level (damage, range, etc.) and what extra tricks you can now do. Being wedded to how D&D did (and with Next now, does things again) is not necessary. There are many ways to do it. Many ways that, IMO, are much better than studying your spell book every morning so you get exactly 3 uses of rope trick but, even though you know swim as a fish, you can't cast it as you didn't focus on it this morning.

I'll just add this in - if you can swing a sword forever without ever needing to sleep, or fire a bow endless without ever needing to rest your arm, or climb trees and swim and all the other physical activies that games almost never track long-term fatigue for... then you should be able to cast spells about as effortlessly. "One problem doesn't get fixed by adding another!" True! Which is why the short rest and encounter spells made so much sense in 4E. (not to mention some of the martial attacks that were encounters to) It's not a perfect system, but a way to track "exhaustion" (mental or physical) is to only let you use certain abilities so many times in a given fight. You can put only so much OOMPH before you need to take a breather, whether that be the will to cast a spell or the muscle to cleave with an axe. As for attrition and resource management, there were the daily powers (spells or exhausting attack routines.) Again, not perfect, but as viable as studying spell books - and it at least addressed that if spell casting needing balancing as you shouldn't be able to drop the most powerful spells endlessly, you also shouldn't be able to pull off the most exhausting physical attacks endlessly, either. Long post short - there should be a system in place (fatique, preferrably mental and physical) that gets used up in a given fight that you can recover after the fight is over. That's tactics in a fight. Long term strategy, at least daily stragegy, could also be represented by needing to get real rest to build up a reserve of energy to pull off bigger stunts - maybe a different pool or stat to track big spells and attacks. Regardless... whether you like vancian or not, mana pools or not, they are equal answer to the question of combat balance and resource management. Both have their pluses and minuses - and I think both could be replaced by something at least as good if not better.

Oh, I played it. And hated it. We immediately did away with spell components as unnecessarily fun-killing. I've never played a role-playing game, in fact, where I've need spell components - unless you talk about the ones where you own a "components pouch" and it counts as what you need. Explanations or no of what happens, they are just explanations for a codified game mechanic - they needed to balance magic spells against other classes, and they needed to give advancing wizards something to look forward to. Instead of just gaining new spells, you gained the ability to cast spells more often. I'm about to commit heresy here, but I greatly preferred 4E's magic system.

Thanks, Obsidian!

I don't hate "Vancian" magic (never heard this term, either, until 4E came out and people were complaining up a storm) but I'm not a fan. I remember playing 1st and 2nd ED, me and my friends would lament there not being a spell point system until we finally invented out own. So I'll not be upset with memorized spells, but personally I feel it is such an artificial construct that, narratively, makes so little sense to me. "I have to re-read the same words every day, and the second I cast the spell - POOF - it's erased from my memory." Whatever.

I'm okay with beta access being higher tier. Both as it limits how many can get in (for the sake of the beta meaning anything - this isn't an MMO, after all) AND as incentive to get people who really want that access to donate higher. This is how other games on Kickstarter did it. I think it is right. I even think they maybe set it too low.

Nail. Head.

Depends entirely on how active they get in promoting the Kickstarter and doing stuff to encourage more (and increases of) donations. If they stay as is, with what I would guess are updates about a day after goals are reached and maybe a handful of other updates on Kickstarter... 1.8 will be hit in roughly four days. 2.0 maybe a ten days after that. And we'll crawl to maybe just reaching 2.2 or 2.3 by end of campaign. However, if they up their game (I expect they will) then it could be in as little as 2 days, with later goals adjusting based on what their game is.

Context is important. In the context of this thread's topic, I'd argue that "mature" means both handling topics in an adult, reasonable, rational and thoughtful way as well as topics that are a bit more cerebral, more graphic, or more controversial. It's the combination of those two - you could have a mature conversation about bunnies or playing hopscotch, and you could have a very immature exploitation of sex, drugs and violence. So, to sum up - mature examinations of mature topics. A considered and grown-up inclusion of subject matter that is considered not suitable for minors and juveniles (the not-adults, or immature.)

"Achievements" as trophies you unlock to share with friends, the kind that include stupid, meta-gaming stuff, is only really fun for something like Saints Row the Third and silliness, IMO. That said, I love getting titles or such in games like Fallout. LOVE IT. So how Steam or XBOX or PSN does them? No. How games like Fallout or Arcanum did them? Yes.

The player-editable edition would be the easiest implementation, but possibly the least satisfying for the majority of players. I mean, you have people who won't care beyond a quest list. So we can say they are satisfied with any journal really. Then there are the ones that if they type it in but the game never reacts to what they type then they don't care to do it. I kind of understand that sentiment. So if they could create some kind of system where based either on player direct choices (for journal entries as they are written) or on choices the player makes during the game (dialog, story, which way they go in quest orders, etc.), or both, that shapes a prewritten journal entry that feels in a developing voice / style that players can feel is "their own" I think that would be the most exciting prospect. Look to Dragon Age: Origins. On the BSN you could click the story tab for a member's character and read what choices they had made. It was a pretty cool feature. Now ignore the social network function, and add some more player choice into the voice of the journal, and how awesome would that be? A finished journal, maybe outputed as a pdf, that you could read or share post-game.

Just saying...

DM does, yep. PnP are multiplayer gamers and you have to adjust for single player cRPGs, yep. Also - I've played plenty of tabletop RPGs where the players control multiple characters. It's sometimes called troupe play. Some games are buildt for it, some allow for it, some don't mention it (but can't stop you from doing it.)

Mostly Icewind, the Fallouts and Arcanum. NWN2, KotOR2 and even ToEE were fine as well and definitely have aspects I greatly appreciate. I'm not a big fan of BG, and not at all a fan of PS:T (I know, heresy around here especially) but I am a huge Interplay/Black Isle Studios/Troika/Obsidian fan, so...

They aren't working on anything together. Ray is going off into social entrepenaurship, and Greg will be focused on drinking, brewing, and interviewing brewers of beer. Ray is done with making games, but says they will remain a treasured hobby. Greg says it will be some time before he's involved in games again, and that he possibly won't return. ... The join announcement. It's just... I don't know.

WTF... announced on the same day? BSN Post Greg's blog. Ray's blog. It is dang hard to not start formulating conspiracy theories in one's head.

I can understand where you are coming from.. and I certainly don't want shallow story, either... hence why I'm not too big a fan of open world. You chose 4 then? I'd be satisified with 4. Just pushing for 6 as much as possible. Given the choice between mediocre story with meaningless but many choices and uninspired yet different endings vs. one good ending and meaningful but few side choices, I'd probably want the later as well. I think those of us in the 5 and 6 range still want good writing and good story. I shouldn't speak for everyone, though.

I pre-ordered TW2 on GOG. I own it, and The Witcher, but I've not even finished the first game yet. It's been awhile since I tried. I plan on getting through both, however, and am looking forward to TW2.

I don't think anyone in this thread was asking for "afterschool special" messages, nor shoe-horning in topics that don't fit the story Obsidian is telling. Straw man is full of straw.

I didn't spend the entire duration of Lonesome Road getting bitched at by Ulysses about the importance of symbols and understanding their meaning to hear Mr. Chris Avellone say the logo doesn't matter. *doublechecks* No, I'm not Chris Avellone. So... you have a quote from Mr. Avellone where he says that logos don't matter? If you do, point taken. If you are conflating my response with him, however... in any case - public domain is public domain. Common symbols are common - if you don't like the choice, don't like the choice. But this is as silly as saying that Dragon's Dogma and Divinity II shouldn't use dragons at all since Dragon Age:Origins had just done dragons.

When he said "we" he was talking about him, me and all the other people with good taste in RPGs that funded this game. Eternity: Hearthfire is a terrible idea. All the best RPGs didn't have houses you could buy and raise families in. This isn't the Sims. Consider me to have bad taste, then, as I have no problem with property in an RPG. I mean, what were those losers Gygax and Arneson thinking when they including players getting their own base of operations (keeps, towers, etc.) as a normal part of leveling up. Those guys clearly knew nothing about RPGs made in good taste.

Yeah, I don't care what Bethesda's MMO is using as a symbol. Obsidian can use what they want.

Asking for more details is not unreasonable. Saying that Obsidian is doing a poor job (as compared to what) I say is. I just posted elsewhere about this - but Obsidian is on track to have as many updates with as much information in them as both inXile and Harebrained Schemes, and forget about Double Fine - they started on February 8th and had their first update on the 15th, a week after they hit their goal.

Thanks for the comment - but you guys are doing just fine! Don't worry about it! Keep on doing the great job you are doing!

I put Shianni in charge of the alienage at the end of the game as my "reward" - she was one of my favorite NPCs from the game. I liked her more than some of the companions!