PsychoBlonde

IMO if they're not going to do a flat AC system like D&D (and that system has serious drawbacks so myeh), then I think they'll be better off going with a multilayered system. 1. Dodge/Parry: this is your ability to flat out avoid an attack altogether. Everyone should start with a base Dodge from race/stats and a base parry from race/stats. Heavier armor/weapons/shields should grant penalties to dodge and maybe cause you to get more fatigue at the end of battles (see my thread about degenerate rest). Larger weapons and shields (and training with those) should improve your Parry. And higher dexterity/agility/speed ought to increase your dodge. ONLY dodge should apply against missiles/area attacks unless you have some kind of special class ability. 2. Shields should grant a certain measure of Damage Threshold, aka Damage Reduction--not too much. 3. Heavier armor should reduce the % damage you take from attacks. And, of course, you should be able to modify all of these statistics with items, spells, and abilities. I don't like stat or class requirements on gear--there ought to be proper *tradeoffs* involved with heavier armor vs. lighter armor that push you toward (but don't require) certain setups. For instance, in the system I outlined here, only characters who can suck a lot of fatigue would want to go with heavy armor--that and people who are going to get attacked a lot so the damage will add up no matter how good their dodge is. But you could also build a dodge "tank" focused on not getting hit, and it'd have the benefit that they would still probably get hurt less by missiles and AOE attacks. There could be another tradeoff involved depending on how the aggro mechanics work--if you set the enemy AI so if they miss their attacks consistently, they change to a different target, it'll be difficult for dodge tank type to keep aggro. You can also make it that heavier armor reduces your resistance to movement penalties. Or that heavier armor reduces your chances of eating a critical hit and getting a wound (see the linked thread.) The degree of benefit/penalty needs to be tuned so that you can't (quite) have everything, but a number of different approaches work. I have no problem with armored mages, and I don't really understand why D&D does, anyway, because an intelligent mage can easily get MORE armor class than a fighter in plate mail. Not to mention Stoneskin and Displacement and other advantages only available to mages. Mages should have precisely the same kind of benefits/detriments from armor as anyone else. Don't want mages using shields? Put in some REALLY SUPER AMAZING OSSUM two-handed staves for mages. That, and don't give mages a bunch of abilities that would stack with armor and make them basically indestructible. Prefer your casters in robes? Make it so their only magical defenses improve Dodge, so they're (probably) better off stacking dodge for defense. Make missile weapons/aoe effects the BANE OF THEIR EXISTENCE because they interrupt spells like ANYTHING. And if someone really wants to play a heavily armored sword-and-board front line tank mage, LET THEM. Addendum: Oh, and dodge/parry should rapidly decrease in effectiveness when you're getting attacked by more than one enemy. This would *encourage* you to have a couple of heavies who can soak a lot of (greatly reduced) damage, while your fast, nimble dodge-oriented characters peel off enemies one at a time and annihilate them. But you could still have a dodge tanks by putting in a class (or a spell, or a race) who can dodge attacks from multiple sources at once--or who simply don't lose as much dodge from being flanked.

I didn't notice if somebody else talked about this, but in philosophy metaphysics is the fundamental branch that deals with the underlying nature of reality. For instance: does reality have certain underlying rules, or is it random and chaotic? Is it ordained by some kind of god or gods? Is it a projection of some kind of "ideal world"? Spirits and such get lumped under metaphysics because they assume a particular set of metaphysical conditions: the existence of an afterlife, souls, perhaps gods, miracles, consciousness that can directly affect reality, etc. So, if you're asking about metaphysics qua Eternity, what you're asking is, what are the fundamental rules underlying this reality? Did the gods create it? Did souls create it? Did it come into being some other way? Does this question even make sense to ask? How do these souls interact with matter? I(Some of this may have been answered somewhere, sorry if it was.) Souls are not physical things, but they can interact with physical things, or at least with energy. Your soul--well, that's not really a good term for it, perhaps. The soul currently inhabiting you isn't the same as your mind or body. It sounds like the living minds and bodies of intelligent creatures may act as a trap or attractor for souls, which stay in the body while it lives but when it dies they depart. The vestiges of the mind may cling for a while but eventually become washed away, leaving only whatever events may have impacted the soul itself. So, when do people become imbued with souls? When they're born? Sometime around age 2-3 when they become sufficiently intelligent or self-aware to attract a soul? When they're conceived? If so, shouldn't plants and animals have souls? What about sufficiently large and interconnected groups of plants or animals? Do people NEED souls to function in some way? What happens if you destroy someone's soul without harming their body? Can they still live? Is it possible to raise the dead? (I think they mentioned you can, but only until the soul actually departs, after that, no dice). Is a soul in a dead body an "undead"? Is a living person without a soul an "undead"? Can souls be placed in inanimate objects? Do souls sometimes remain attached to dead bodies on their own? If so, what exactly is it that anchors a soul in the world, or sends it back to purgatory? What process brings souls OUT of purgatory and back into the world? Are there a finite number of souls?

I just want to be able to play my character as that kind of horribly outrageous and outgoing female that makes guys squirm, blush, and run off. Or, alternatively, a staid old maid who can't be having with any of that nonsense. Having a couple of cute guys around who want to get in your pants is flattering either way tho.

If they decide to do this, I'd rather they do it AFTER the game is finished and released, as DLC or similar. I've messed around with modding tools some myself, but I'd rather have the game be really awesome than be able to futz with it a bunch.

Is there a list of the OTHER companions yet?

I find most "plot doors" where you have to go through some ridiculous rigmarole just to get through to be utterly ridiculous. I do like having an option to attempt to bash, but I don't mind if some things can't be opened by brute strength (such as an enormous stone door, or a magical portal). I also think that if you need exclusive locks and traps to justify the existence/inclusion of an entire character class, that character class is badly designed.

Lol, it's a meta-poll! Are the devs likely to decide what to do based on the polls? Probably not. Are they of interest for the actual community? Well, people vote on them, so they must be. It doesn't hurt to register your opinions, you never know what might stick.

Ugh, I wouldn't have liked this either. It could be pretty annoying in Oblivion, too, because some of the NPC's would hike halfway across the world map periodically. I DID like the way Gothic implemented this, though, because although people moved around, they (mostly) stayed in the same area, and if it was 2 am and they were asleep, you could wake them up to turn in your quest doodads. There were a couple of exceptions--a group of Templars who walked almost the entire way across the map and back daily--but I never found it difficult to locate people when I wanted them, and seeing them eating with their buddies or repairing their house was pretty sweet. Also, it had features where if you asked somebody for directions, often they'd actually LEAD YOU THERE--whacking monsters out of the way for you if the route was dangerous, and waiting patiently for you to catch up if you dithered. Granted, Gothic is a different style of game, but some of these features can be pretty cool if the devs have the time/energy to implement them.

Or, they could do both--have most items be "revealed", and if you have a high "spot" or "perception" or "notice" or whateverthehecktheycallit skill, you get a "there's something interesting around here!" announcement, and if you search (and find it) the whatever-it-is is now revealed by the tab highlight. Everybody wins.

I will say that the isometric perspective doesn't lend itself all that well to traditional Eye of the Beholder-style dungeons. The narrow corridors in BG were absolutely dreadful and I am SO glad they improved on that for BG2. That being said, this does NOT mean they can't have a huge, sprawling, complex, puzzle-filled, difficult-to-navigate area to explore. I think this is a great idea. Just don't try to squeeze it all into one map.

Yes, I am on board with this idea entirely, although I didn't love the Baldur's Gate narrator. It'd be cool if, at some point, they reveal the identity of the narrator in some manner, too.

I like all classes to have abilities available. I don't like it when the classes are split up into "spellcasters" and "auto-attack turrets".

Question--if you bought a VCR and later switched to a DVD player, would you complain like this about having to pay "full price" to get the DVD version? Or the BluRay version? How about this--get it on GoG and then wait for it to go on CRAZY sale on the Steam store (which it surely will eventually) and get it for like, $3.99. But don't try to make the devs responsible for getting you a copy on every conceivable delivery system you might possibly want to use. It baffles me how people think they're entitled to have everything from every source. You are not buying "the game". You're buying a single copy, through a particular delivery method. Accept that and learn how to weigh pros/cons and make choices.

Yay, it's someone who seems aware that they probably won't be able to see their eyeshadow! If the budget allows for it I'd totally like to have a set of options for your character model other than just Generic Human Female. They can (probably?) do height on a slider, it's not like there's going to be cinematics where it's important that your mouth and your LI's are on the same level. This would also allow for greater variety with NPC's.

I am SO on board with this, in fact, I'd like to see options where you can theoretically make a really good Int-based "fighter" or a strength-based "mage", but you might get other limitations like there are only 3 types of weapons you can really use well or similar. I love making weird builds, and the more available the happier I am.

I, personally, find stealing repugnant so this is not an aspect of the game that I've ever used. (I am NOT saying that if you DO like stealing, you're a bad person. Just sayin' how I am.) I really detest quests that you can't finish without picking a pocket, largely because I'm a bit compulsive about "cleaning up" my quest book. I would prefer stealing to not be SO profitable (a la Fallout 3) that you're a fool not to take everything you can get your grubby mitts on. I'd prefer to see it more as an optional system where you can accomplish various tasks in different ways. For instance: 1. Your Stealy character can sneak ahead into a group of enemies and take all their potions so they get to fight you without buffs. Maybe if Stealy McStealsman is REALLY good, he can take their magic items or even WEAPONS, thus nerfing them into laughable territory. 2. You can steal quest items from people if you so choose (and your Stealer is good enough), thus circumventing the need to go to the Distant Dungeon of Farawayness to get the Magic Bunny Slippers to swap with them. (I'd also like to see, say, dialog skills that let you do this, or magic, or even just bustin a cap in their ass if that's what you want to do.) Likewise, if you really don't want to hack your way through a dungeon, no reason why you can't send the Stealer in alone to get the Quest Item and skedaddle. Assuming it's a fetch quest, anyway. 3. Funny situations like, if you steal some Valuable Artifact from Some Rich Dude, you can come back later and get a quest for him to find it and bring it back for a reward. Or, people show up and try to get it from you. Or you steal it from one person and plant it on another to antagonize them against each other. Maybe even the Exploding Pants thing. 4. If you steal from shops and get caught, people will start chasing you out of their store rather than deal with you. Granted, some other people might be more inclined to deal with you. 5. There ought to be a mechanic for getting caught after the fact--you try to sell to someone you think is a fence, and they turn out to be a cop, or a lot of people may recognize unique items as being stolen (and it should NOT mark in your inventory whether you stole something or not). Really unique items ought to have people using magic or other extraordinary measures to "track them down".

I actually really like the traps in Dungeons and Dragons Online, because they are actual physical THINGS you can avoid. They also are indiscriminate--they hit monsters just as much as party members. (Also you can set your own traps if you're so inclined.) So using and dealing with traps becomes a fun and tactical part of gameplay, BUT they don't mean "you must have a rogue in the party at all times" because you CAN always circumvent the traps without searching/disarming if you are so inclined. If you do have a trapper, though, they grant up to 15% extra xp from the quest, so it can be nice to disarm them when possible. That being said, I don't think they're a necessary element of gameplay and if they decide to dispense with them, I won't get all teary-eyed.

Now, I will admit straight out that I am a total stat hoe--I am that person who will sit there clicking the "reroll" button in Baldur's Gate until I (this really happened) get a set that looks like this: 17 18 18 18 18 18, and then when I take a point out of int and put it in Str I wound up with 18(97) 18 18 17 18 18. I am not kidding. I am that freakin' nuts about this. I don't generally like point-buy systems that much in single-player games because they limit my ability to do this. Granted, they also mean I'm not sitting there clicking the button for half an hour before I can start playing the game, so I can live with it. Still, I'd like to hear other people's preferences! Assuming we have "starting stats" of some kind, how would YOU prefer to generate them?

I am 100% behind this ability. One of the things I HATE about the Dragon Age series (and I should go down to Bioware's forums and make an irate post about it RIGHT NOW before I forget) is that you have NO IDEA about the numerical functionality of an ability until a.) you spend a point on it and b.) you try it out. Abilities that sound kinda mediocre (mana clash) sometimes turn out to be unspeakably powerful, whereas abilities that sound powerful (curse of mortality) and ARE when enemies use them on YOU, turn out to be crap. The debuffs are the worst--you have no idea how much they actually debuff, and since most of this kind of stuff in the game hovers around 10%, the effects are UNDETECTABLE. So you never use them. I don't care if the formulas make people's eyes bug out, LET US SEE THEM so we have a shot at judging whether we'll like an ability before we pick it up. That, and we'll also have a more accurate idea of how to get the most out of it.

Interesting ideas there, and I just outlined the basics of my idea, there's plenty of room for modifications like stimulation items (which would reduce fatigue temporarily but increase it when the timer ran out) and having "better resting" eq/sites. All of this would add some interesting depth without being terribly fiddly or over-complicated. I'm not trying to please anyone, I'm just pointing out that a.) resting in the BG games, and most other games with a rest mechanic is degenerate (which the devs have also mentioned) and b.) here's a single suggestion on how you could, hypothetically, solve this problem. There are probably a great many solutions to make the resting mechanic a vital and important part of the game without people simply resting after every single encounter or, alternatively, dumping the classes that need to rest (casters, predominately) and just going on and on and on and on until their characters really ought to have collapsed. How do you know this? I personally have not seen anything where the devs have said "no cooldowns", and cooldowns are and can be a great mechanic for realtime play (or realtime + pause) because they put a limitation on how frequently you can use an ability without also limiting the number of times overall that you can use the same ability. You could probably accomplish the same goal with longer and shorter casting times, because if it takes you 20 seconds to get a spell off and it can be interrupted at any point, you're likely only going to be using it as your initial combat-starter--too hard to get it off when the fight's fully engaged. As I said, this is by no means the *only* way or even the *best* way to solve the degenerate resting problem. It's a group of suggestions that form a fairly functional system without being so outside-the-box that new players will be baffled by it. If people want to come up with other alternative systems, I'd love to see them.

In Arcanum you had to sleep in a bed, right? So it's basically the same as the "you must rest at the campfire" one. I don't think you needed to rest in Arcanum, did you? It's been a while, but I just remember that they had a wait for x number of hours mechanic like in Fallout. I used this a lot rather than wait for ten minutes of real time while my my stamina slowly recovered. You could also sleep in a bed for a given amount of time and recover all your hp and sp points--but it had to be an "available" bed, like one you rented in an inn.

Yes. I played through on a monk and I remembered the hunger mechanic as being wholly superfluous--I never managed even to get into the yellow, and I never consumed souls.

I really enjoyed the Quest for Glory series (well, the first 4 anyway). I particularly liked the resting mechanics in part 3 where you had that HUGE African savannah map, and when you wanted to rest you'd build a campfire and snooze. The random encounters could be entertaining as well. In Game 4 wandering outside of town at night could be *extremely* dangerous if not outright deadly until you picked up some abilities to let you defend yourself. Gothic had an interesting resting mechanic not in how it was executed--you had to sleep in a bed just like Arcanum--but in the fact that it was REALLY FREAKIN' DARK at night and due to the limitations on torches it was really easy to get lost and stumble into some horrible monster that would eat you in one gulp. Either that, or you would just run straight off a cliff. So for most of the game, when it started to get dark, you ran to town, hopped in bed, and rested until dawn. You didn't rest a whole lot while you were out and about exploring, though, you'd mostly eat food to recuperate when you got wounded or ran low on sp.

All of the above. I enjoyed aspects of all those games--and they were pretty similar fundamentally.

In Arcanum you had to sleep in a bed, right? So it's basically the same as the "you must rest at the campfire" one.