Ieo

Waypoints! There could be Camp Sites scattered about the world, mechanically they would be like "Waypoints" in Diablo II, you have to find them before you can use them. These points could also be points in which you can Fast Travel from Camp Site to Camp Site (Without going to the "edge" of the screen). Remember the Scenario Sawyer brought up and asked us about what was good about the experience of walking back to camp? I can totally see how this Camp Site thing could be directly combined with that. There is a camp fire in Baldur's Gate, right outside a Goblin cave (in Tradeway North). For some reason I always rest by it when I'm in that area. There could be different difficulties on it too, in hardcore mode the Mule can be slain, but in Casual/Normal the Mule always flee's. Just wanted to fill out this because I found the thread http://forums.obsidi...er-suggestions/ Why did I want to link to this thread? Several hours has passed since I began writing this Pack-A-Mule thread and the inspiration and flow of ideas I had back then seems to be gone, remembrance as well. I think it had something to do with fatigue and camp site features fit very well into each other? Or something? Anyways, yes sorry again for bumping/double posting. Right, I was thinking of the campsite-mule-stop-waypoint thinger as something related to the rest mechanic in that thread. (Repeat: I want it all! Cooldowns, spell slots, mana, rest, fatigue, soul!) Something to help with both inventory and whatever interesting post-combat mechanic they come up with. Oh, allowing the mule to be slain at harder difficulty levels would be a nice touch. You wouldn't lose any of your stuff, of course, you'd just have to figure out what to carry... Edit: Per the inventory UI mechanics, it's hard for me to discuss without a bunch of pictures, but ideally drag-n-drop would only exist between party member inventories. Clicky for everything else, including vendors...

Well... Didn't Obsidian say there's going to be a subrace of Elves that are technologically like in the Stone Age or something? (I forget.) Given different racial technological levels, I don't see why that would preclude spear and shield, maybe as a racial thing...

Wait a shale-diggin' minute--I don't want to be spoiled too much, so knowing joinable NPC names and classes is already more than what I knew going into Baldur's Gate and PS:T and whatever--hopefully Obsidian doesn't give away their backgrounds or anything, but... Well, shoot, maybe I should.... stay.... away..... ........ can't......

Yeah, I didn't notice that until I took a closer look, but it made me laugh. I remember someone commenting about how awfully long it looked, I think in the armour-plea thread. Funny. I really hope the monks can use "fist weapons" of some sort or are even required to do that. I mean... punching undead is one thing, but punching a fully armored fighter, for example--meh. On the other hand, if the monk has a really fun personality (like Tiax or Jan or something), I may very well keep him around. Female Dwarf ranger doesn't have a name yet. Can't wait to find out more. O the teasing!

Hm, I didn't notice an amulet but it makes sense that she's holding something at her chest. The "energy" light around them could either be from that or whatever the wizard is doing--what if that's a group manifestation of soul against the undead? *intrigued* Of course, this is just concept art, so... Man, I wish.... (tattoos).... Maybe as a special 'gear' slot related only to soul.... (Hey, I can dream.) The reason why "paladin" can't exist as a discrete class is because, as others have said, alignment doesn't exist, only reputation, which makes more sense in the "RP-to-interact-with-world" sense. Paladin by DnD definition requires the alignment. Just make a fully armored priest and RP the lawful good in-game...

Yes, and that's really why I used to dual/multi class a lot--there were just certain companions I wanted in the party, or I wanted to try a new configuration and had to use my PC's skill spread to cover party weaknesses, which is all well and good. Or for solo. D&D 2ed was very (how do I say it) limited in that regard. I don't remember 3.x and never touched 4. In other games like MMOs I still always played hybrids to cover any group shortcomings or emergencies, and it did help. So this intra-class flexibility in the update does make me very happy.

True hybrid classes are actually more up my alley but those are very, very hard to balance mechanically. So flexibility within a class, as LadyCrimson says, sounds fabulous. I would say yes to Cadegund. Is...... is the girl archer the Dwarf? She doesn't look short enough, but there's the perspective.... *squint squint* Female Dwarf ranger companion???? :D I think we see Edair, an Elf wizard (or priest), a male human? monk, to. And I'm guessing the setting is the mega dungeon.

Ciphers sounds really interesting! The tome mechanic--I think I like it and sounds like an interesting method of control over typical wizard powers. The above sounds like it addresses the requests to allow fully self-made parties, but not at game creation. I wonder what the "over time" means. Intriguing. Good option to have, I'd like to see it. Edit (omg my edit button is on the fritz): Ah, no mention of multiclassing or the like. But : Perfect.

I'm still neutral about them... And I hope people remember not to consider a "cooldown" only in a vacuum. We already know there will be "rest." And there is a yet undescribed soul mechanic. Nothing ruling out mana/power, fatigue/exhaustion, and anything else people can think of. I think with some creativity, a combination can be very interesting. And tactical.

This should be merged.... You can also read Bobby Null's explanation that, except with a "very large amount of money," you can't have good MP and good SP together, and trying for good MP requires concessions on SP.

They did port the Baldur's Gate world to console. It was an action RPG game (2 of them) called Dark Alliance. It's a different game compared to the original BG series. I don't know how the dialogic content compared. They definitely couldn't do PS:T on a console--that's mentioned somewhere in a different interview. Edit: And keep in mind that Baldur's Gate was a AAA title with publisher backing and marketing.

No, I think bringing up requests countering explicit and already publicized decisions is stupid. Example: Asking for PE to not be isometric. Seriously? Stuff like that is plainly written all over the Kickstarter page. There are many other aspects of this game that up in the air or fuzzy around the edges that are ripe for discussion, but specific technical and business decisions like this that have already been made--that were part of the original Kickstarter business proposal--aren't.... (And Obsidian doesn't lock threads except under three very specific conditions, so I'm not worried about that.)

After the decision is already made and given all the reasons not to and Obsidian's own stance? Yes. Constantly bringing up the request is pointless, especially on Obsidian's own forum. Trying to put forth arguments from only the end-user perspective and not considering far-reaching economic and systemic issues to which end-users have no idea about (like Avellone says), is pointless. If Obsidian especially feels they as creative developers have been kept down while trying to keep consoles in mind, that's all the more reason not to ask them to do it. It's practically offensive at this point. That's why I suggested in the other stupid thread on this topic that the only possible way this can happen is if Obsidian is willing to start a brand-new Kickstarter just for that--a different kind of game.

Relax, you dont like it, dont post in it. Follow basic courtesy rules, my man. Its just a discussion. I've pledged and am fully supporting and backing this venture as a PC game, nothing more or less. Its all "what-ifs". Chill. All well and good. Why not think about Obsidian's feelings on this (interview)? So why not? There are a lot of reasons not to. And because they don't want to do it.

Sure. Let Obsidian calculate the costs (manpower to strip half the dialogic content and redo the entire GUI, and all the console licensing costs and whatever) and start a totally brand-new unrelated Kickstarter. See how far that goes. It will be a different game--make no mistake about that. Under no circumstances should any of the current Kickstarter funding go towards any other platform besides PC. NOT EVEN any of the subsequent game purchase income should go to that, because the hope is that Obsidian will build their own franchise--and if it starts out pure PC only, it should stay that way.

People are mixing up application of the word "realism" at the high level, so I'll semi-repeat myself from another thread: Comparing a purely metagame social implementation of armor rooted in decades-old sexist (yes, I used the word) tradition of titillation for an extremely enclosed nerdy male gamer subculture with little access to the female sex... is hardly the same as an extrapolated in-game combat implementation taking into account immersion and the additional female gamer audience of this day and age (Obsidian still has to consider their current target audience). The original mindset underpinning boob plate and chain bikinis was (and is) a marketing tactic to a very particular, small, socially limited audience, and utility wasn't (still isn't in many cases) considered in-game. At all. The reason to change it now finally includes in-game immersion reasons alongside the increased number of female gamers (btw, the only people who demand boob plate and bikini chain without condition are indeed male gamers who believe they're entitled to titillation--even women who say they are fine with it always add a contextual caveat and/or "equalizing" factor). As for even finer distinctions of in-game "realism" per combat like melting metal and burning cloth--straw man. The appearance of armor in-game to allow immersive interpretation of realism for both female gamers and mature male gamers does not by any means alter actual combat mechanics that make it difficult for Obsidian to implement. Asking for realistic and immersive in-game gear for women is not, by any stretch of the imagination, an overly burdensome thing and does very much affect the overall intent, audience targeting, and feel of a mature game. The addition of other mechanics for realistic combat or even taking into account magic are different arguments and do nothing to address those particular three points (unless you're talking purely about cosmetic melting and burning and the magical gear somehow heals itself or you have to go to an armourer to cosmetically repair, I dunno).

Thanks, Ink Blot. Per the graphic novel: NO. The other book is enough for higher tiers, and a graphic novel/manga (I already know who asked for it) is a small demographic, besides which Feargus' point drives it home--it's pointless to the actual development of the game, which is what stretch goals should address. As for the Obsidian Order... Honestly, if it's something like a cult, I hope it's a small faction the PC can recruit to help them with some larger mission, whether good/bad/whatever. I'd rather it not be a mindless cult because that doesn't speak well of any fandom... unless there's a quest to kill them all. (LOL)

I do like the idea of a mobile campsite while adventuring--it does make sense, and the utility can be fairly broad with some creativity. I didn't particularly like DA:O's for various reasons, but that's probably more arising from disliking several other mechanics in it, so whatever... Visually, I'm combining the pack mule and a campsite. On a BG-like isometric view, a "blue circle" neutral mule would be following the party but staying out of combat (running off screen or something); maybe there's a "campfire" button on the UI that allows you to drop a camp somewhere on that map and the mule automatically stays there. Utility would include not just extra inventory but cover other potential mechanics (Rest and whatever). Specifically about loot interface... Something easy but reasonable--minimal drag-n-drop, stuff like that in terms of usability.

I agree, but the problem is that every aspect is somewhat linked. So the Topic of Mage Spells is related to Cooldown, which in turn is related to Resting, which in turn effects your entire party as well as "How to tackle Dungeon?" tactical management. I understand where you're coming from, but the forum venue is still limited in this regard. You can easily create a "magic system" thread, and I'd argue a "tactical combat" thread with higher-level discussion is better than trying to tie everything to only magic, since there are other classes involved not to mention soul (which we know so little about). Web writing is very different composition theory compared to literature and other longer forms.

Honestly, individual ideas should be broken up into individual threads. The forum format with threaded conversations is not built for this kind of thing. One giant, topically very messy thread (because people respond to specific topics that interest them, which means not the entire OP) is far less useful than multiple threads on different topics for deeper discourse and "staying on-topic" as it were. This ENTIRE forum (subforum now) is the playground for ideas. Just sayin'...

I'll ignore the poll questions/answers since they're broken anyway. The "as good as" cannot be answered as a unified whole because every player has different priorities when enjoying a game. Just looking at the IE Trifecta games is a good example: IWD (mechanics), BG (exploration), PS:T (story). If I'm after exploration and story, I would not care if combat is "better" than the IE games (I'm not sure how it can be better or worse except "different"). If someone else is after the IWD experience, then they're going to obsess over the mechanics. There's no way to answer the poll. (At least, if we're being honest and not after cloning, like Vancian purists... )

That same argument should be used in the arms and armor thread. 'Reality' seems to be applied inconsistently by people. No boob armor or chain mail bikinis because that isn't realistic! Women not as strong as men? Who cares if that is the case in the real world. This is a game! This seems like a reasonable point on its face. Except that comparing a purely metagaming social implementation of armor rooted in decades-old sexist (yes, I used the word) tradition of titillation for an extremely enclosed nerdy male gamer subculture with little access to the female sex is hardly the same as an extrapolated in-game combat implementation taking into account the additional female gamer audience of this day and age (Obsidian still has to consider their current target audience). To me, that's like comparing puppies to pineapples. Also, that armour discussion is in the realm of physics. That said, while I am personally in favor of minor 'stat' differences between male and female counterparts in the PE world (not too much, like 1 pt off STR to 1 pt in DEX or something in early BG terms), because this variable is in the realm of biology*, which has a primary initial effect on that sort of thing, Azrayel does bring up the extremely legitimate point that most everyone is talking strictly on human terms. Obsidian has the creative freedom to mix it up concerning races. Maybe the men become pregnant in one race. Maybe they lay eggs. Maybe the female sex is actually stronger. Maybe one race does require little armour because they have hides or scales or something. Maybe the mammary glands are located somewhere unexpected ( ). In terms of prejudice exhibited in-game, considering the depth of culture I expect from Avellone, I expect to see the full gamut of various things among race, sex, size, coloration, whatever. It would be even better, however, if our PC can have an effect, however small, on such views if we try. * Traditional definitions: Sex = the biology of the organism Gender = the social role derived from outward sex characteristics

The cut scene after my battle with Ravel (that confrontation was on a whole other level too). I was utterly gobsmacked.

I did not like the IE games because of the Vancian magic system. As Lohi says, I tolerated it; I adapted just fine, but by no means did I enjoy the Infinity Engine games for one combat mechanic. Goodness. That's such a one-dimensional view of the IE games that it's rather sad.

Because this game will have different races with different cultures and subcultures, I want to see cultural relativism and the "moral" frictions that occur among the boundaries. I have a diverse set of friends across different philosophical, religious, cultural backgrounds: Indian subcontinent, Far East, first and second and third generation immigrants, a generation older than me and younger, Baha'i, Muslim, Christian, Pagan, atheist, etc. What is "correct" in one culture may very well be "wrong" in another, and vice versa. I think the truth I have learned from meeting so many people--who in their own ways try to live good lives and impact the world in positive ways--is how incredibly arbitrary our realities are.... (It's an exceptionally dangerous view, though. ) I'm confident Avellone will think of some juicy stuff, though.