Baudolino05
-
Posts
109 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Baudolino05
-
-
While I'm certain there are some people are against armor "cut outs" because of prudishness, I'd say most people arguing for realistic armor are actually working from the idea that armor that doesn't cover more than a 1/5 of your body isn't armor, its decoration.
I'm not against sexy clothes or even decorative garments made of chain or plate. But realistically unless they're forming a magic barrier around your character, they really shouldn't have any effect on your ability to deflect or withstand a blow.
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.
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
2 Fulplate have numerios problems:
- Bad Ventilation
- Too heavy
- Too thin
- Overheating
- Low mobility
- Difficult dressing
- etc. (Read "Handbuch der Waffenkunde. Das Waffenwesen in seiner historischen Entwickelung vom Beginn des Mittelalters bis zum Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts " by Wendelin Boeheim.)
Fullplate armor used only in isolationists medieval Europe and European always fail when trying use this against East Nations.
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...
-
I would rather have half-naked characters like from Planescape Torment and Barbar Connan then the 'realistic' looking armors. We had enough those already in past RPGs. And if the enviroment permits it and we aren't stuck in cold climate like in Skyrim it would be quite fitting as well.
Also, those that cry about realistic or practical armor just don't know what they talking about. Fully covered plate armor was ever used only by heavy cavalery, and even then guy had to be put on horse with lift. You don't ever walk around in heavy armor, go to market , date , meeting with leaders of country or just visit a friend in that kind of equipment.
Not to mention that from realism point, you all reffer to, that armor has absolutely no meaning, and serves as nothing but aesthetics to which it should bow in the first place. Take for instance typical leather armor, that wears Prince of Persia in Warrior Within - that won't protect you from anything, maybe a little scratch on chest, but any dircect hit and you dead. The same with any kind of armor except maybe those heaviest that you wear while ridding a horse because they are too heavy to walk in. Even more so - in age where guns are, it would be more apporopriate to dress like people from 17-18 century (see Pirates of Caribean) - favoring a light clothing mostly, and only soldiers carring chest pieces and helmets. And i am not even mention fact that there will probably be a magic, and until the armors will be made from some kind of anti-magic material they will be all but useless - example a Inquisition style faction that hunts witches and sorcerers would found no use in armor as it would not protect them against their main opponents.
Of course this is fantasy, and not a realism and thus it should follow its own path, and in my opinion the aesthetics should always be top and should fit in what setting and atmosphere Obsidian aims for.
I personally would want all the armors, dresses and clothing to mirror those of Sigil from Planescape Torment, which had both scanty cloths as well as strong and meanacing armors.
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
-
2
-
-
While I'm certain there are some people are against armor "cut outs" because of prudishness, I'd say most people arguing for realistic armor are actually working from the idea that armor that doesn't cover more than a 1/5 of your body isn't armor, its decoration.
I'm not against sexy clothes or even decorative garments made of chain or plate. But realistically unless they're forming a magic barrier around your character, they really shouldn't have any effect on your ability to deflect or withstand a blow.
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
...-
1
-
-
Scaling then fixing encounters does not sound much different than what was done in Oblivion. The only difference is that in Oblivion the enemies kept on scaling, in PE they will not level up any further. At least that is the way it sounds (to me). It is hard to say how excatly Obsidian is planning on implementing level scaling.
From a designer standpoint the result is the same, but frankly I would prefer to fight against 2 orcs instead of one insanely strong.
It needs clarification and an official statement. Until then I will stay calm. It was probably just an unfortunate choice of words, I really don't think that Obsidian is going to basically tell all of the fans of the IE engine games to go F themselves.
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...
-
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
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're either blatantly lying or simply don't have a clue what you're talking about. Probably both.
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
-
BG 1 had free exploration and no level scaling at all. It was a wonderful and challenging game.
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).
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
-
Work under restrictions from licensing and publisher:
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...
-
BG 1 had free exploration and no level scaling at all. It was a wonderful and challenging game.
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/
-
2
-
-
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
-
ZOMG wasn't this the truth. Thieves were basically pointless in pnp 2nd edition D&D anyway. Need to sneak? Get the wizard with invisibility 10' radius. Clerics got Find Traps as a 2nd level spell, and it was 100% effective whereas your rogue actually had to search and roll dice. Backstab damage only multiplied the base weapon damage and was far less worthwhile than having a good strength. And they got screwed on AC and HP.
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)...
Just please keep in mind that "each class can excel in something" shouldn't mean "we put some annoying obstacles in that can only be bypassed by this one particular class so you'll be obliged to haul them alongI'd almost suggest you sample some Dungeons and Dragons Online if you haven't gotten to it, because here is a game with 13 classes yet all of them are distinct, bring something unique to the table, and yet you aren't absolutely STUCK with having any of them--well, apart from raids which cannot really be done without clerics or favored souls because you need the big heals. But you can (and I have) do every. single. quest. in the game with ANY kind of party makeup. And most classes have plenty of opportunities to contribute in areas that aren't their main focus. Fighter types can CC enemies with Trip and Stunning Blow. Rogues can heal with Use Magic Device. Wizards can tank.
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).
-
1
-
-
Because people are voting for and against your post. It has nothing to do with you, but the other users.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?
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?
-
Plate isn't the end all be all of protection. It has gaps and joints that can be exploited, and for certain forms of damage mail is more effective. Though mail is more expensive and heavier.
Of course you could wear a mail hauberk under a breast plate, if you didn't mind burning to death.
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...
-
3
-
-
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".
If it was up to me and it is not, I would like to see a dirty looking evil feel to the characters. It fits in with that time period .
...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...
-
I always wanted to play an RPG that would be characterised by hardcore realism. I don't think Project Eternity is going to be that game, but the OP's question is what I would like, not what I expect. This super realism could be reflected in many ways:
- hunger and thirst mechanics: it's necessary to eat & drink to survive (recenty done in Eschalon series very well); of course the game would have to provide ways of acquiring food, e.g. hunting; also cooking mechanics (more below);
- sleep/rest mechanics: every hero has to rest and sleep, they are not machines (unless they are); therefore, sleeping every X hours should be obligatory -> staying in action for too long without sleep would result in significantly reduced effectivness (negative modifiers); again the game would have to provide suitable funcionalities, like the ability to set up camps; it would also need to make resting less of a drag; there are many ways to make it interesting...you just need to be inventive (I have lots of ideas, but it would take to much space to describe them all
); - setting up camps: this is associated with the above; it would allow the party to rest, eat and also cook their food over fire for additional bonuses; in camp characters could repair equipment/make simple equipment (e.g. arrows), heal wounds, gather herbs for alchemical mixtures etc;
- wounds don't heal themselves; magical healing potions are a rarity and are extremely expensive and/or can only help up to a certain degree; healing would be done by using special non-combat abilities, healing kits and spells when camping; healing serious wounds would take a reasonable amount of time; you could also go to a specialist to be healed quicker for a price; minor wounds would heal quickly, as usual;
- the party should consist of more characters than the maximum allowed in combat; if e.g. your PC walks around with a maximum of 5 characters, the whole party should have 10 members, so that if some of them are too seriously injured (and remember: healing takes time), you can substitute them with others (the old X-Com games anyone?);
- combat less frequent but more substantial; short skirmishes with weaker opponents, just for the fun of it, could be more frequent;
- day-night cycle and dynamic weather affecting NPCs' behaviour: at night they sleep, shops are closed; when raining they seek shelter and complain etc. (recently done very well in The Witcher games)
- weather affecting combat and characters: rain makes fire spells less effective and lightning spells more risky; wind makes ranged weapon more difficult to use; plus characters have to mind weather conditions: if they travel in snowy mountains, where temperatures are rather low, a shirt and a chain mail is not enough to protect them; wearing a full plate on a desert might not be a great idea either; if they don't have suitable equipment they suffer penalties, perhaps wounds as well;
- I've got more ideas, but I don't want to make this post too long...
I'm aware only a limited number of gamers would find such a game interesting, that's why I don't really believe it will ever be made...unless I do it myself ;P
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...
-
1
- hunger and thirst mechanics: it's necessary to eat & drink to survive (recenty done in Eschalon series very well); of course the game would have to provide ways of acquiring food, e.g. hunting; also cooking mechanics (more below);
-
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....
-
1
-
-
yes, it was. But usually a lance broke after the first charge.
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.
On swords vs. other weapons: Yes, a variety of swords were popular simply because they were useful in such a broad array of situations if you had the proper training. That said, they were also common among the elite simply because they were expensive prestige weapons and humans aren't always rational about such things. And while spears were often used because they were effective in large groups in set piece warfare, a person with a good degree of training could do far more with a spear than sit in a line and poke people.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.
And on unrealistic weapons and armor: I'll take one exception here, assuming it fits the world building. If a piece of armor or weapon is explicitly designed to be utilized with some form of magic, then it doesn't have to be realistic by our standards. It simply has to be realistic by the setting's standards, such that its form very much fits its function. It's function just has no real world analogy. That doesn't mean giant World of Warcraft/Anime swords necessarily, either. Which I'd prefer were avoided do to personal aesthetic reasons.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...
-
1
-
-
Heh, personally this is the best automap (and notes) system I've ever tried (sometimes hard to align the text, but hey
):
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?
-
Do you really want realistic armor?
To be honest, I prefer these "helms" to your magnificent spiked dark elf armor
-
1
-
...
?...
);
Armour and weapon designs - a plea.
in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted · Edited by 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