Ink Blot

That was actually Gygax/Arneson (and TSR). The BG series and IWD1 were based on the AD&D rules, which used thac0. The more 'sensible' d20 system of higher to hit roll vs higher AC wasn't developed/published until around the time of IWD2, which is why it used the 3.0 rules.

Both sides are guilty of this. Witness the backlash against the Codex review. The vitriol in that thread posted by the game supporters that attacked the Codex, the author, and hell even that it wasn't a 'review'. Then the rebuttal threads that were posted because of it. Both sides are guilty of painting the other with a broad - and unfair - brush. Unfortunately, it seems we've come to the point where you can neither praise nor criticize the game without responses becoming nothing but personal attacks.

I have the feeling they were at least considering encumbrance. There's a character bark something like "I'm not a pack mule" when an individual inventory gets filled. Can't recall the complete bark but every time I hear it, it makes me think they were going to go with encumbrance because of the way the line is delivered.

I can't speak for them, but I'm here because I care about the game. I see potential in the game, but I certainly can't say I like it yet. What I'm not doing, however, is telling people that do like the game how wrong they are or that they're somehow not 'open-minded' enough to see the 'truth' about the game.

I'm going to have to check it out. I first picked up D&D way back in 1977 (blue box - remember when Elf or Halfling was a class?), but haven't yet checked out Pathfinder or the new 5.0 edition.

Why is it so incomprehensible to you that some people find the game just average, and other people find it terrible? Kind of like, oh let me just pick some random game out of thin air here... how about Baldur's Gate? Or Icewind Dale? Yeah, there are people that don't like some of the classics on which this game draws its inspiration. Is it really, honestly so hard to grasp that some people find flaws in this game - more than they feel can be fixed to make it a great game?

All this argument about the different games and which one is better. Here's my metric: IWD1 - played through it at least 3 dozen times IWD2 - at least 1 dozen times BG1 - again, at least 1 dozen times BG2 - twice to the end, well over a dozen times through most of it PS:T - actually played through only once, but only actually obtained a copy a year or so ago (this is one of the best games of all time though) DA:O - played through 5 times. After the first run, I immediately did a second run. Several partial runs D:OS - played through once and immediately went through again Wasteland 2 - played through 3 times to the end, and numerous runs (at least 6) to the end of Arizona PoE - played through once. Will likely play through a second time, but probably not right away. Not sure if I'll do more. Depends on what Obs decides to do with updates/expansions. This tells me all I need to know about PoE and how good it turned out. I expect no one will agree with me on all these though.

Sounds pretty similar to how I went about it. I think I recall the "Hey, if you do this quest, you'll piss off the other guys" comment but, again, I assumed there would be provision go back on your agreement and go talk to the other factions to see if they had a more interesting offer if you didn't actually complete that quest. Oddly, there's an interaction towards the end of the game where you can actually do just this. (Can't go into detail, as I'm not sure how to do spoiler tags).

I wasn't. Different tastes, and all, I guess.

Assuming you're referring to the Warrior, Mage, Rogue (or DPS if you prefer) and Healer, these archetypes far predate MMOs. And, as noted, there are only the first three in DA:O.

This would only have people wasting time waiting for time to pass, or traveling from one area to another to force time to pass. Honestly, I don't see why there needs to be a change to it. As it is, it serves as a small deterrent to spam-resting if you don't want to waste time traveling to inns. I don't see a good solution to this 'problem'. Either the resting is so restricted that it just annoys the player, or it's completely irrelevant like it is now. I've yet to see a real middle ground.

Aw, man! I bet that would've been great. Is there a link to a description? I've never seen this system mentioned before. (Yes, the stash irritated me too.) If my memory serves, you started with just one row of slots per character. The stash was still infinite, but you could not access it unless at an inn or merchant. *edit* Or while camping.

I honestly don't see the point of camping supplies at all. Those players that are bothered by the limited supplies are just going to run back to the inns anyway. The rest aren't bothered in the least by the limitation. I did both a normal and hard run and didn't even notice the limitation. It seemed to me, at least, that it was a completely unnecessary restriction as it had no bearing on my gameplay.

Yep, and I figured it was a transposition error as well. Can't think of anything that fits the DAS:RoT acronym any closer.

Agree with the vast majority of these suggestions. Kudos for taking the time to compile such a comprehensive list: Hidden Object Found.

I'm guessing Drakensang:River of Time?

I stand corrected. Apologies.

Oh, yay! We're going to insult peoples' intelligence now are we? Here's my last word on it: in a roleplaying game such as this one, given that you can actually lie about some of the things you do, I don't think it's unreasonable, despite the warning that you will piss off the other factions, that you assume you can play both ends against the middle and maybe go to the other factions and double cross the first one. Especially since you haven't actually done the offered quest yet. Whatever.

You're correct, of course, but as ShadowStorm noted, it seemed reasonable to assume you could accept the quest and decide to renege later on. No reason to assume that faction would immediately send a runner to the town crier to announce to the other factions that you accepted a quest. Not a huge deal, as I just shrugged and rolled with it. But I did assume that even if I accepted the quest I might be able to twist it to my advantage and possibly use it as leverage with the other factions. Not an unreasonable thought, I believe, since some of the other quests to that point allowed you to lie about them.

It's not actually a choice if you're not given the opportunity to realize you're making it.

It's the Watcher/PC's story. When everyone's a special snowflake, no one's a special snowflake. Anyway, we've made our points, I guess. Probably not going to find the middle ground on this one.

Still doesn't sit right with me. My view is more old-school in that the player character(s) are viewed as exceptional and far above the norm. Even though the NPCs may also be viewed as exceptional, they still should be created under the same rules as the player is constrained to. As I noted, I find it cheesy and contrived when they can have abilities the player's class is restricted from picking, scores the player's race is restricted from attaining, or any combination of that.

Oh crap, you're right. I've got too many tabs open.

Happened to me too (getting locked into a faction that I didn't want). But that wasn't the reason I almost quit playing. I found I was more compelled to read the boards and was thinking about other games than I was to finish this one. However, I slogged through just to see the end of the game. There's probably a way to console it, but I don't know it. It could possibly muck up the game as well. But as others have said, you may have a way to rectify it later.

As a counterpoint, I very much dislike this idea. For one thing, I find it cheesy that NPCs have access to abilities or higher ability scores than possible for the player. The companions are following you. Why would they bother if they're obviously more of a hero than you are? This kind of thing just doesn't sit right with me.