Margaretha

You are right assuming you pull the string close to your chin. But you may check some anatomy -like yours - to notice you do not need "large breasts" to risk some trouble, especially when you release the string. So, it's usually just some piece of leather you wear over your shoulder. You often use such protection around your wrist too. (btw, the string in the drawing is weirdly put)

Speaking of boobs, what about Sagani's as an archer? It's a genuine question. I used to [do archery] in some club, and women usually wore something to flatten one of their breasts.

Or not, "TheOptimist". You are mentioning the importance of reward. Rewarding a player is important, in pen and paper rpg just as in a computer one. I think there are different ways to reward a player. There is a purpose to be "realistic" when it comes to benevolence. Helping someone with the idea you are going to be rewarded is not a "good action". It can even be pretty "evil" in some "Cugel the Clever" kind of way. If I had to formalize a gameplay proposition about all this, it would be to reward treachery with some tangible reward: gold, items, something mechanically useful. And to reward selfless action with just... roleplaying reward. "the kids are safe, thank you, good bye". The important thing being: your good deed has been acknowledged. The game master gave you his blessing, (s)he's noticed. You've roleplayed your paladin well, Samuel. Am I... understandable? Saint-Good-Samaritain gives his purse to the beggars: good for him. He's got 100 gold pieces less, and... that's it! Now, maybe, he'll not obtain a magical dagger thanks to this action, but something like a "Oh! you're the Good-samaritan! well.. you're dumb/marvelous/suspicious/" it's been acknowledged, that is satisfying, that is a kind of "reward". *sigh*

Ermf alright, but I think we are all saying the same "I don't want the usual good=+10 evil=-10 neutral=0 scale because I'm so grown up". It was not my point. That is why I may ask a question as... more or less.. "what if 'being good', in the familiar and simplistic ways we are used to in CRPGs, was something exceptional and difficult ?". Implying that being "evil/'neutral'/coward/bad-person" (still in this simplistic but usual definition) is the "easy way", just like in real life?

It is difficult for me to be subtle in this language. And it is even more difficult when it relates to morale in CRPGs and the frequent (but convenient) binary good versus evil. GhostofAnakin and John Lemon, maybe you are right, I am not sure I understood what you meant. But I am tempted to elaborate the "line of thinking" I condemn myself, Internet forums being what they are. It is probably caused by the way I played pen and paper RPGs when younger and the mercyless game master who has fashioned my education in this matter. I can try to put it differently. In "my game", being good could be rewarding. The player would be rewarded with dialogs, some "good ending", or whatever. But, being good would make the game a bit more difficult. You can see this as... hardcore mode if it makes any sense(?). Because being a coward in real life is the "safe route". Because being a bad person is taking a risk, some efforts, to obtain something trivially pleasant or helpful (the money, the woman, the magical item). But being "good" is being.. courageous? Some woman bothered by bad people, you choose to go and you get beaten up: ojectively, you've lost more than you won. Here comes the talent of the designer: your choice has not to be perceived as a bad choice. You'll obtain a reward, maybe at the end of the game, just a line of dialogue, but your action, your "sacrifice" has been *acknowledged*, it had a meaning and when you look back at the game you will tell yourself it was "fun", "meaningful", or something. "Something" positive despite the possible obstacles it created thereafter.

I would like an RPG, maybe this one, to be a bit like Gulliver's Travels. It could offer the player and the developers the opportunity to play with civilizations concepts, weird tribes ideas, of believable and original, and fantastic (as in "fantasy" ?) cultures. New place = new culture, little-endians or something else, a pretext for brain-food, something that would give the player fresh ideas on a topic (women role included). Creating the new place, the new chapter, would require from the designers mandatory questions, including language, history, economics, morals and... genders' roles, indeed.

I would see stamina based on several attributes, maybe endurance and willpower or their equivalents. And also on health points. If you are physically (or mentally) injuried, you should go down faster. But you could sustain more being a strong-endurant person with a will of iron. I like this HP/stamina distinction. Stamina is closer to HP interpretation from Gygax in a way.

Furiku, please... you are embarrassing yourself.

The issue, I think is not an issue. Not being a feminist means you want to keep or reinforce inequalities. If "some feminists" say poor things, I don't really care, they are only a handful, when people openly sexists and sexists who "believe" they are not sexists (privileges denial?) are legion. As far as videogames are concerned (and I'm not too worried about Project: Eternity), I'm looking forward to playing games that do not seem to have been made for sexist-white-straight-horny-male teenagers (God of War certainly shines here). What about games made for the others? Oops I meant: for everybody?

Errm.. Feminism (= wanting equality) is not a "belief", not even a "sociopolitical belief". I'm surely glad the topic of sexism in videogames is more and more heard. Things could change, and it's good. I'm actually glad when I read people saying they are "fed up" with it.

NWN(2?)'s style. It's uglier but beautiful hand-crafted portraits are very limiting and I never really connected to any (speaking of my character's portrait - I loved some companions'. Dynaheir !).

I'd like the stronghold to be a secondary questline. Something about an invasion in a reclusive place, with weak but numerous creatures to protect from. Developing the stronghold would slowly turn the tide, allowing access to "something" new.. (new power, new place, whatever).

It's not a new idea, and I'm pretty sure it has been discussed here somewhere (a search saw me return empty-handed). I've seen many discussions about how could be defined a "mature game", and people usually agree about the fact that it's not about boobies. That boobies may even actually be a sign of immaturity. There's also the question of the topics used in the game, and the morality when it comes to choose and to live by its consequences. "Being bad/evil" in many RPGs for instance, is often playing an (uninteresting and not "mature") "psychopath". I remember this question being brought by Peter Molyneux. Something about "being good is the hard path / you can be good and save the persecuted, it is an available option. But it will cost you an eyeball". I like the idea that being bad is not being a psychopath. It's being greedy, lazy, or a coward. It works the best when it appeals to the player behind the PC. If you must permanently lose 1 point of strength to save someone (who won't even give you a kiss), will you do it? I like that because it's challenging you as a (role)player, not just your character (I think it's used in Divinity 2 to some - scanty - extend). Would it be punishing? Rewarding? Hey, it would be optional, you could choose to be a ****. Being a hero is not that easy, it would cost you. Actually, there is no real value to "being good" if it does not cost you something. Is there?

I remember Betrayal at Krondor's, but Baldur's Gate 2's...? there were riddles in it? my-my...

@eimatshya: Yes, that popped from my mind too, but wouldn't we feel more comfortable calling the meta-dungeon you describe as a recursive dungeon? is metaphysics recursive physics, etc.? I'm sure we could find something better. @Fooine: Yes we have to seriously dwelve into the subject of meta-dungeons (with or without tunnels). More so we actually must find out why Obsidian should implement one. [proposition] A definition: a meta-dungeon is a dungeon effectively traveled by the hero, without the hero setting a foot inside. The dungeon is never shown to the player. An example: the hero's involvement could include some soul fragment stolen from him (her) by a telepathic creature, sealing itself inside the dungeon. The hero figures a way to take enough control of the creature so he can give it orders. For the creature to fight its way up (or down) to the exit (and the hero's hands), the hero will have to help the creature removing obstacles. The hero cannot see from the creature's eyes and cannot take direct control of its body, but he receives data as puzzles to complete, dialogue options and involvement of a third party.

This fellow comrad over there seemed to ask for one ("Meta-dungeons. I want one. With tunnels."). It stroke me curious. I have played many CRPGs, but this concept, I did not know. It seemed popular enough to be called that way without further explanation, but I could not grasp its meaning. You Americans can be so surprising. I was genuinely curious and it took me some time to realise I misread the title. I had smelt a scent; but *it* wasn't here. Now I'm left alone with it. What is a meta-dungeon? Why or how should Obsidian make one in Project Eternity? Meta is one of these words/prefixes/greek-wanamingos not always understood or properly used, but often found in these times of Internet, along with "virtual" or some others I cannot figure right now. XML is a metalanguage, as in "a sort of language for describing another language": fine. Steam achievements are called "meta" as in "a game above the game". Now, you'll define "metacarpus" as a bone spatially close to the carpus. But there is not one easy definition of metaphysics, is it? Meta-dungeons (or even... metadungeons) would benefit from being known, if only we could give as good definitions and examples as we can, from which one would arise. This is where you come in. [proposition] I'll try, you will do the same. If one of us comes up with a good idea in the end, we will notice. Pre-definition: a meta-dungeon is er... something er... potentially fun and cool... in a CRPG. DON'T BE SHY, soldier, push it, push it hard show me your wawa! your_head.pop()! Fine... a definition: a meta-dungeon is... no, wait. First, what is a dungeon? a trivial definition, not exception-proof. Remove the flesh, keep the bones: confinement, (incremental) spatial progression, danger, reward, exit (the end). Add in some flavor (not too much): verticality, dereliction, stone, traps, monsters, loot, final challenge. Now, we make something meta out of it. A definition: a meta-dungeon is a course of events involving no dungeon nor any of its required steps as defined, but forcing the characters to take steps in parallel that could be defined as the steps required to define a course of events as a dungeon. An example (?): Heroes arrive in this fortified village in the middle of Forest Nowhere. Camera sequence. An alarm: big wolf-beasts are back to harass the people, the doors are shut down. Some old curse. To get rid of it, you have to progress from one villager to another until you can finally convince the tavernkeeper to activate the old defense mechanism in his basement. But each NPC hates some each other and you have to convince one after the other to help the next-other. The stonemason (stone) won't help you until you could convice the old crazy (dereliction) ermit in the attic (verticality) of the temple to do something about the child catching (traps) mutant frogs (monsters), who won't do anything unless his cousin (...) at the end, the tavernkeeper is fed to the wolf-beasts (final challenge), they leave and you can leave too (exit). Or, maybe, a meta-dungeon is something completely different, you tell me. Help me help the game. You know the rules.

They lied to you, oldmanpaco, because... they hate you. They hate you so strong they whish you were desperate and miserable and dead and alone and they gave their poisonous gallbladders your name, oldmanpaco. This is why they lied.

According to the fact that Project Eternity is the closest thing to a sequel to Planescape: Torment we'll ever see, what will you people miss the most from the ol'game? Maybe some of it is to return (slang ? complex architecture? amnesic he... no, wait), some will probably not. I liked the D&D Planescape's settings. Portals that could be opened anywhere at anytime, mostly accidentaly: the world felt mysterious and insecure. I also liked gods being tangible and having bad temper. Above all, I liked the alignment system. I know, I know, this is often despised, but in Planescape, it is so absurd (the whole universe is based on alignements) it is brilliant and offers the best dialogue trick I have ever seen in a videogame: the ability to lie, in a relevant way. You know, dialogue options where you could choose "1. [truth] I like you" or "2. [lie] I like you" etc. Dialogues shaped your alignment, and in Planescape, your alignement mattered (where in Forgotten Realms/Baldur's Gate it does not do anything). I will miss that for I see no way to redo it without copying. What about you?

Writing a romance from a designer/writer perspective is difficult and time consuming. I'd rather see this talent used on dialogues of another kind. Plus, I know me. If it is in the game, I'll want to play it, as cheesy as it feels to me. It's fine if you like it, I'll just complain if it is in the game. Not a big deal.

This is pop culture and we both like it. You like it as it is, I am a bit bored and often annoyed today. RPG has not to be about saving a damsel in distress or being attacked by wolvess. It can be, and it can be done well, but it can be something else, because it is not what makes an RPG an RPG. I have been saving damsel in distress for 20 years. THAT is boring. I would be willing to try something new.

Hello Darji. This is the internet and I find myself disagreeing with you. I know, it may be a surprise. First of all, I am not telling the developers what they should do. I (and others here) am just saying what I would like to see, what I, humbly and personally, care about because I enjoy CRPGs and I am looking closely at this project. So, I am sure we have much in common. Maybe you knew it but could not express it properly (it is fine, I am not clear myself when writing in this language). Unfortunately, this is internet. Sexism is a hot topic and causes many threads to be closed. Many players do not see an issue in sexism. You do not and you are even fed up with the topic, like Badmojo. I am sorry you feel this way but please, let's just be... cautious and respectful. If you wanted to win something, I give you all. You won, I will not be able to fight a troll war in english. NOW, about tropes/stereotypes/<any word people prefer> and Project Eternity: Obsidian probably already chose much of what is going to be put into the game, they gave us this forum nonetheless. I chew the bone happily. One thing I would like to say is that Obsidian is in a position to renew CRPGs. To invent something. I think that giving a kick in some "tropes" (the ones I do not like, of course), could be what could make this game a great game, a new reference. Choosing to step deliberately aside from the gaze of the horny teenage (and male, and white, and straight) computer-roleplaying geek we all have been to some extend. (btw, Brienne > Red Sonja)

I share OP's concern and hope RTWP will be well implemented. I am no specialist, but I would insist on: - Numbers: a text box with details about the actions; dice rolls, "X begins to cast a spell", etc. - Responsivity: the feeling that the character is actually doing what the player asked him/her to do (relies heavily on well-designed graphical tips).

Yes, the question is important. Even from the simple perspective that crowd-funding ressources would be used to develop a feature that is player-hostile by definition.

(personal and humble opinion, poor english, sorry, etc.) Obsidian people and us all here are old roleplayers, jaded to some extend; white hair here, and there, not the horny teenagers focused on cheap tricks, dat sorceress illustration, powermaxing skills anymore. Not to that extend, at least... we have our weaknesses, sure. We'll hide them. This is what I want to believe. Now. Tropes are in the mood. Some could be avoided as said: - Bikini armors and sexist clich