Tamerlane

To be fair, dispel, remove magic, secret word, spell thrust, breach, pierce magic, true sight, warding whip, ruby ray, pierce shield, and spellstrike are all Things That Exist in BG2. And while the game includes tooltips to help you tell what is what, it is pretty unintuitive and can be very irritating for the unitiated, so I can't in the least blame a person for wanting to avoid the whole thing. Which will probably be feasible in PE, albeit not ideal, as they've said that they want to avoid combat scenarios with "must use X to win" encounters (e.g., "monster immune to all weapons below +3").

Wait, are we counting Black & White 2 and Fable 1 as Molyneux's good games now? Incidentally, Byzantine records of the first Crusade include mentions of a few armed and armoured women in the armies as they went east. Unfortunately, they do not say whether or not they ever fought.

RPG Let's Plays are best done in screenshot-and-text format, though I understand the desire for live commentary from Avellone. I'm... conflicted.

But... but javeliiins...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umDr0mPuyQc

Sawyer has talked about "hybrid" weapons, so I wouldn't be surprised to see some polearm variants.

Alright Mark, you've already revealed the existence of both 1- and 2-handed spears. So the only important question remaining is: Javelins?

Wait, are y'all really settling on the cat gimmick? Daaaaamn.

To be fair, I'm pretty sure Findlay was on steroids. Terran lore in SC can pretty often be summed up as "also, he was using a ****load of drugs".

Get the voice actors of Xenoblade Chronicles for PE. So that every time can be REYN TIME!

Good thing this is a game, and not my job?

EDIT: "Degenerate gameplay" seems to be a thing whose meaning changes depending on who says it, and I bet Sawyer regrets ever bringing the phrase up for that very reason. As he uses it: "Gameplay degeneration isn't a pejorative commentary on players using it. When I write about gameplay degeneration, what I mean is that both the intended gameplay styles (from a design perspective) and the players' desired gameplay styles effectively go out the window because the system rewards some other method(s) of gameplay. It's not a gamer's fault for making use of an obvious loophole or method of min-maxing, but it is our responsibility (as designers) to try to align fun design intention with actually fun gameplay." So you would do side quests, even if there was no xp reward? Interesting. If I liked the quest, yes. You're not pushing a conversation forward if you just make things up, tovarishch. They have proposed precisely zero things to actually stop us from fighting. They have removed one of the rewards for it, and if you think that that's the same thing, then I don't know why you care all that much because apparently you don't like fighting in the first place. Last I heard, they were still on glancing blow for half minimum damage, and considering full-on misses/dodges. Don't think I've seen a JE Sawyer post on the topic since then.

If you don't like fighting, then why do you want more reward for fighting?

Given what Hunter S. Thompson has taught me about badgers, this sounds about right.

I believe you damage the target with the implement's attack itself.

Well, this is enough of a thing that I (and pretty much but not quite only I) care about that I already did a big-ass bearbehaviour.txt post: EDIT: Well, she was obligated to kill anyone who stood in her way, but she didn't much care to kill everyone who stood in her way, so maybe her "defective" torso "armor" was intended to weed out as many bosom-susceptible folks as possible from the "get in my way" pool. *shrug*, Haha. But, anywho, I totally get what you mean about wild animals. Thing is... you could have some pretty basic AI running for that. Most wolves are going to rely on pack numbers, and circle you (flank you), for instance. And if there are 6 of you, and 12 of them, and you take out 5, they might honestly all just pull a strategic retreat. They're not all vicious, starving creatures with a vendetta against humanoids. I know we talked about enemies' fleeing behavior in reaction to the changing of battle factors in another thread, but I really want to see a lot of wild animals not even engage you unless you're charging them or are approaching their lair, or they happen to be really, really hungry (more of a random encounter than "every single wolf you ever see in the woods.") See, I think it'd be cool to have an encounter built around a wild animal. Like, you wake up to a hungry yearling sticking its head through your tent, or something. Or, "there is a moose carcass on the road with a bunch of wolves tearing into it and they will defend it if you approach". But if they're sprinkled around a forest, I'd rather they just... y'know, run away as soon as they notice you. Because that is the sort of thing that bothers me in my vidyogaems.

Wild animals as enemies. God damn I hate wild animals as enemies. Real-life creatures with complex and varied reactions to human encounters always get dumbed down into "run at the guy and bite him" (wolf, large cat) or "walk up to the guy and bite him" (bear). If you can't do it right - and most RPGs are not wildlife simulators, so I sure as hell wouldn't expect them to get it right - I'd rather they just not bother. Just turn the wolves into goblins and the bears into golems or something. Or humour me and call them "hell bears" and give them a red tint and a fire attack or something. Just... just no grizzlies lumbering up to a party of six to whack away, alright? Aside from Samara's ENORMOUS and generously exposed bosom. Which I found tacky, since, as you say, she was not a sexually driven character in the slightest. I think that was added either to emphasize her motherness, or as a compromise with Morinth, since they had to look identical. Whichever they were trying to do, it was turrible. Samara's cool and all, but she looked silly as hell.

I'm cool with the new paladins. If I want to play a D&D-style paladin, I'll roll up a priest. Simple as that.

Clear spell AoEs. I know a lot of people here are mixed on DAO, but that was one thing it got very right: not only did you know where the spell was going to land (see also: NWN2, the new Xcom), but you knew exactly what you were going to hit, provided none of your targets moved. None of that "oh, yeah, dude was 1/3 inside the blast radius, but his hitbox is actually 2/5 of the way into his body" bull****, y'know?

Customizable grid-style hotkeys. Bonus points if you can change which set of hotkeys you're using with a single keystroke. That'd be pretty baller.

I know Obsidian has kinda moved away from it, but I'd like to see a Ravel fragment pop up in PE. AKA, "the only good part of Drakengard 2".

Hey guys, what's going on in h- Burn all videogames forever.

Josh actually talked about that already. DR will affect miss damage, though it will always let at least 20% of the attack through, similar to New Vegas. He also said that builds focusing on keeping minimum damage high and relying heavily on miss damage won't be very viable.

I want to know more about the less-talked-about classes like chanters. And I want to know how stealth will work, because I've never been a fan of "push button to be invisible".

I also do not want to be either compelled or intrigued.