Baudolino05

Your idea of full plated knights fighting each other http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gt62wW_NtNQ What happens in real life http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlfrmCUGoKE Feels different, doesn't it ? PS: man, don't take this the wrong way, but reading a book and quoting some random lines from wikipedia doesn't make you an expert of historical warfare. Try again when you have systematically studied this matter starting from Greco-Persian wars and have practiced different combat styles in person

This is wrong. In real world Armor evolutionize from fullplate to lighter Landsknecht armor, from Landsknecht armor to Cuirass covering only Torso. Armor covering whole body is stupid idea. So, it was because covering the whole body it's a stupid idea, not because the diffusion of gunpowder weapons made plate armors essentially useless and, as a direct consequence, high mobility became once again preferable to high protection in military tactics. Good to know ... Oh, another "expert". 1. Gunfire not effective before late 19th century. http://en.wikipedia....Charge_(warfare) hihhi, man, you are really funny. You know that, right ?... http://en.wikipedia....Battle_of_Pavia http://en.wikipedia....le_of_Cerignola And I could continue till the end of times... Starting from XVI century the number of battles decided by gunpowder weapons had an exponential growth. But an expert like yourself surely knows that Like in the siege of Vienna or Malta, right ? I thought European nations started to kick ottoman asses right in XVI century. But maybe I'm (as any other historian on Earth) wrong. PS: see above for the advantages of Plate Armors. If you wanna references. I can give you all the titles you need, both modern and medieval...

Thanks God you know what your're talking about, man . 1- In late middle age there were specif formations of foot soldiers that fought in full plate, especially in Northern Europe armies. 2- The flos duellaturam, arguably the most famous middle age fencing manual, has an entire section dedicated to the fencing in full plate. So, essentially not only people fought in plate, but they did it with a specific (and absolutely efficient, believe me) style. 3- A complete plate armor is definitely more comfortable than a full chain mail suit, and just slightly heavier. You can run in full plate, obviously not at full speed, and you can even jump. 4- Among the first pieces of plate used in middle age there were leg protections... And before you ask, I fought both in chainmail and plate armor, with swords, polearms an maces, in company of people that study historical fencing and perform historical reenactments

This is wrong. In real world Armor evolutionize from fullplate to lighter Landsknecht armor, from Landsknecht armor to Cuirass covering only Torso. Armor covering whole body is stupid idea. So, it was because covering the whole body it's a stupid idea, not because the diffusion of gunpowder weapons made plate armors essentially useless and, as a direct consequence, high mobility became once again preferable to high protection in military tactics. Good to know ...

From a designer standpoint the result is the same, but frankly I would prefer to fight against 2 orcs instead of one insanely strong. You are right. As I said I'm not a fan of level scaling, but I could accept this abomination in some particular cases. So, I wanna more info too...

I should ignore half of these idiotic comments made in an apologetic frenzy, but since they're addressing my posts... yeah, I can't resist to slap them down. 1. The topic is about level scaling. So what kind of encounter scaling are you talking about? 2. You don't seem to be able to use mod tools. 3. Still no level scaling, right? So you're saying BG had scaling because (MAYBE) a few more gibberling appeared based on your level? Doesn't matter if all named enemies and everything else was the same regardless of your party XP, right? 4. I tried. Don't see your point. 1-The one you had in the EI games . 2- You don't get the difference between level scaling and encounter scaling and I'm the one who doesn't seem able to use mod tools? Yes, why not? 3- The point is that Obsidian can easily arrange the difficulty of SOME encounters simply changing the whole enemy party level instead of the single mob level. Probably this is exactly what they gonna do considering IE games worked in the same way. 4- Yes, and did you always find the same encounters in a normal game, right ?

You know, what? I was thinking exactly the same 1- I just told about encounter scaling, not enemy level scaling. 2- Do you really think you are the only one accustomed to mod tools ? 3- Scaling is automatically made through a simple script based on the party experience. Nothing that you can change via encounter design 4- Try to solo-play BG or BG2 and than came back to tell me if I'm wrong or right

It did, or, to be more specific, it had encounter scaling, something that you have in any p&p session (at least with a good Game Master). http://www.rpgcodex....-scaling.45566/ It didn't. You point me to a thread where one of the first answers is this: "Only BG doesn't have level scaling. BG2 has." And I explained what kind of "level scaling" is in BG2. Can you prove that BG1 has level scaling with specific examples for each area? You can't. Woah, great logic, I'm impressed! Can you prove that BG1 hasn't level scaling with specific examples for each area? You can't. Are we done ? BG has encounter scaling, as many other old shool classic. This is one of the reason you can solo-play the whole game (the other one is that AD&D is a ruleset where it's almost better to have a level 3 character than 3 level 1 characters). PS: anyway. Don't get me wrong. I'm not a fan of level scaling. Generally speaking, I hate it. But there are some exceptions

So...what's exactly so awesome about those concepts? Absolutely nothing. They are weird and "diffeent" but the novelty wears out in 5 minutes. I would say everything, starting from the concept and finishing with the execution, but...it's Planescape, a setting born to make incoherence consistent, This is not the point, anyway: the point is you can have an equally interesting character with a 100% realistic style...

It did, or, to be more specific, it had encounter scaling, something that you have in any p&p session (at least with a good Game Master). http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/baldurs-gate-level-scaling.45566/

So, what's the point? Are you suggesting that you need an unrealistic style for the sake of character design? There are a couple of guys/gals from from Vampire: Bloodlines that wouldn't agree

No, they weren't, at least with a good GM. Invisibility and move silently are not equivalent (one effects the sight and the other one the hear); thieves have other useful skills like lock pick, pickpocket, hear noises or climb walls, and furthermore in a p&p session is never a good idea wasting spell slots, considering that you can't rest whenever you want. AD&D is among the most unbalanced p&p ruleset ever created, but no class was really useless in that system. AD&D videogames made some of them trash (all without exception)... Frankly, I can't understand why a good RPG designer should look to MMOs for inspiration about combat, considering that they are simplified versions of RPGs. I would suggest good real time tactical games instead...

Frankly, if you're worried about tactical depth, you're looking in the wrong place. Having more than a path to develop your class it's about strategy, not tactics. Of course having options in character development is good, but when it comes to combat it's not the point. The point is building your game not around godamn "sacrad trinities" or "agro bul****s", but around real tactical concepts like area control and synergies between units, and you can have both with any class system (or, of course, without classes).

Because people are voting for and against your post. It has nothing to do with you, but the other users. No, believe me: 2 sec. ago I've logged out, lost 1 point, logged in again and regained the lost point. And this happens every time I do the same. Senseless...

Ok, first question first: why the hell my post gains one point every time I log in and lose one point every time I log out?

Believe me, a terrific well crafted chainmail didn't cost half as a cheap plate armor in late middle-age, and it wasn't heavier at all. It was just less "ergonomic". An average full plate armor weights a little more than a full chainmails suit (30 kilos against 25-27), but when you wear a chainmail you feel like all the weight is on you shoulders, and is not comfortable at all. Furthermore a plate armor is generally considered better against any kind of attack, but obviously has weak spots, so you need to cover them with something flexible like chainmail. PS: before you ask. Yes, I tried both kind of armor in person...

I picked the ranger too, but, frankly, we are still far away from the art style I'd like to see in this game. Considering the main theme of PE (souls and all that stuff), if I was in the art director shoes, I'd tray to achieve something more historical accurate and at the same time "exotic". ...What?

I asked about the systems used in PE to handle non combat situations. I mean, I know there will be a reasonable amount of non combat skills in the game, but there will be also an (even simple) stealth system (Bloolines, you know)? and challenging dialogue mechanics (a la Planescape)? Some sort of resource management? How will exactly world map exploration work? Etc...

You don't need to wait for the RPG of your dreams. You can just play one of the three Realms of Arkania (the second one is my favorite). In these games you have (almost) all the above and even some addictional feature, like item consumption. Once in a while, for instance, party member's boots crack, and if you don't change them ASAP your characters get sick. PS: this high deegre of simulation looks great in the first place, but after 40 hours spent in a game becomes a pain in the ass. For a good designer survivalism should be a sub system of the game, not a mission of life...

Valuable addictions. I especially like sub options and chance to change on the fly. This way you kind find your perfect balance right from the first playthrough....

I thought that was a myth. No, it wasn't. I saw it with my own eyes and furthermore any modern-day test confirm that it's a fact, not a myth. If you hit something solid like a shield (or a body) charging horseback there is an high chance that your lance brake. That's why knights used to bring a second weapon in battle. Polearms were the most common kind of weapon from the Neolithic age till the beginning of the modern era. No need to ague about that. I just explained why swords remained popular among western knights even in the late middle-ages. I agree. What really matters is the internal consistency, but, frankly, I cant' find a good reason for using a "unrealistic" weapon vs armor system, as long as "realistic" systems prove to be equally balanced...

Surelly it is.....And Ultima Underworld is also incidently one of the best RPG you can play

I love personal notes, both for map and journal. But you know what I like even more? A quest design (and a dugeon design) that actually requires players to take notes...Without the second feature the first one is useless.

To me as long as factions don't interact each other are a boring feature. Obsidian did a great job with the faction systems of FO: NV and AP. Why copying an inferior system like the one you have in TES?

To be honest, I prefer these "helms" to your magnificent spiked dark elf armor