Tamerlane

****. I always mix up my big-eared, snot-oozing, gnome-haters.

Accept no substitute.

I can't answer for the other person, but I hated DAO's codex. You want quest details in your quest log? Nah bro, they're in the codex. Want to find a specific entry? Get to clicking, ****, 'cause this **** ain't labelled.

Presumably the codexes of Dragon Age or Mass Effect.

Every game should have a UFOpaedia.

To better fit the language of the culture he comes from, I'd assume.

I will not sleep soundly until we get another game with Daggerfall-esque armour. You just know that dude has asymmetrical pauldrons on under his robe.

I'll confess I'm surprised by the "3/4 at most" thing. It makes sense, but I'd figured they would just throw surcoats over them and rely on those/cloaks/feathered hats for colour and differentiation.

I'd have thought Xcom Apocalypse and Arcanum would have taught people that you can't translate turn-based into RTWP (or vice versa) without taking any hits by now. Guess not. unless that was precisely the OP's intention OP did Pearl Harbour false flag chemtrails in my smart meter. Thing is, I think most people don't really give a ****. I prefer turn-based, but I still really enjoy RTWP. Most people can enjoy Civilization and Total War without slipping in to overwrought histrionics. I wouldn't worry too much about funhaters screeching betrayal.

To me it just seems wrong to sell something as a D&D game and then want to go real-time-with-pause, like the Infinity Engine games did in the first place...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmJ4pKXNAPM Turn-based is fun. Real-time-with-pause is fun. Don't be a baby.

People give way too much of a **** about this stuff.

Arrange as you like? Pfft. Rollplayer.

Pictured: Muscle Wizard casting Power Word, Kill.

I don't think it would be safe to assume that, no.

They prefer to be called Muscle Americans.

It's kinda funny. My first time through BG, I accidentally missed the ankhegs entirely until near the end of the game. When I did run into them, I was all ready to fight this hyped up enemy and they just kinda... died. Timed quest, yo.

What can I say? He obviously just got out of a tough battle with another high-level fighter who successfully countered all of his defencive maneuvers. Don't blame a fella for running on fumes at the end of the day; blame Vancian Swordfighting.

He'd already used up those Combat Maneuvers for the day and he couldn't rest until he finished that fight.

Aw, that's lame. I guess they wanted to give rogues a bigger niche, even if traps seems like an inherently ranger-y thing to deal with.

That's something Josh Sawyer has specifically talked about trying to avoid. EDIT: To clarify, they're trying to get away from binary pass/fail on skill checks. So it's not "Oh, you're five under on your mechanics skill? **** you, you don't disable the trap. Come back when you level up, bruv." It's "Five under on your mechanics skill? Yeah, sure, you disable, the trap, but you'll break some tools in doing so." This lets specialists still feel special without completely stymying non-specialists. They also want to make sure that while a class can always be "the best at what it does" (like rogues with stealth or fighters with deflection or whatever), the gap does not naturally increase with time. So if a rogue starts with +15 stealth and a fighter starts with +0 stealth and they're both focusing as hard as they can on stealth, then at level ten, the gap between them will be the same as it was at level 1, rather than the ballooning differences you often saw with skills and saves in 3.X.

I would certainly hopeassume that rangers would get a bonus as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VaDr3WbCzQ

Sounds to me that a lot of classes will have Aoe attacks, i hope it wont make every combat tactic: spam aoe abilities on every cooldown. Though other classes will have abilities for crowds, barbarians are the only AOE-centric melee class.