sparklecat

It's like what the Bodhi battle in BGII could have been. You could gather allies, think you could add holy water to her pool of blood, get special anti-undead weapons, blah blah blah... or you could just ignore all that, charge in, and slaughter her. I'd have liked the first route to be mandatory, where charging in with no real prep work gets you slaughtered by the powerful creature you just insanely and arrogantly took on. Ancient magical creatures should be scary.

Origin stories? You mean like Arcanum, or like Dragon Age?

If the reason the NPC got powerful is that they've spent the last couple thousand years fighting majorly powerful enemies of their own, then I don't care what my 25 year old PC has been up to the past three years, I expect to die painfully if it's just setting my power against theirs. If they're at all possible to kill, then it should be a major undertaking, requiring outside allies, planning, preparation, and lots of risk. No "oh look, it's another pit fiend, ho hum."

Here's what I said I preferred in the other thread Caerdon just mentioned. Summary: spells "level up" individually with use plus mana pool/global levelling benefits. I'd prefer an energy system over the Vancian system, and agree that cooldowns feel artificial, but I'd actually really like something that takes into account the need to learn still. Never made much sense to me that I'd know perfectly well how to cast Fireball for a year straight, and then because I hadn't picked it for a slot one day, I'd suddenly forget how. That's not how brains work, and if there was some other explanation for what was going on, the games certainly didn't make that clear. In real life, I may have access to a book that I can refer to and use to slowly, say, integrate by parts or whatever, but the more times I refer back and use it and practice, the less I have to use the book until eventually I don't need it at all because the method's understood and memorised. Why not something like that for magic, without going the Morrowind route? Let us start out with a few spells in our party-wide book, find (with a certain selection unavoidable via main quest) or purchase more to add to it, but make improving as a magic user include an element of practice, where the spells are always available, but the cast time for each individual one decreases the more you use it, eventally plateauing. Maybe refine your technique (learn shortcuts, get to recognize commonly used integrals in my maths analogy!) so that they become more powerful or use less energy too. Would be a fun way to really personalise your character and encourage planning for different possibilities, without leaving you completely screwed because you prepared all fireballs today/put all your points in the fire spells/whatever and just ran into a dragon. You've still got that icestorm available, and maybe if you're a little more balanced in your training time/during non-essential fights in future, you won't end up taking quite so much damage because you keep looking at the notes you made on your arm while you're trying to cast.

On the one hand, having a major new stretch goal that requires delaying release to expand the game seems a bad idea because having a proven success is probably a really good way to get funding for future installments. On the other, I want them to take all the time they think is appropriate to do it right. Personally, it won't make any difference to my pledge since I've already given all that I can afford at present. What I'd like is for them to keep accepting and tracking donations and making new goals, possibly even ones you can choose between for your donation, on their own site after the kickstarter drive is finished. Because as a poor, starving student I may have no more money now, but I'm graduating next June and (hopefully) joining the ranks of the employed! I'd be happy to give more money after this initial month is done to support such an awesome game, especially if it's specifically earmarked for features I care about. I'm not actually all that fond of some huge goal, either; I like the little "another 100k and we can write in a new companion" model. Only problem is that it seems somewhat limited in how much they can do so, to me; the amount of work needed to add someone new, a new race, whatever, is going to increase every time they do it. So yeah, at some point they need to either stop, or move over to a type of stretch goal that can be added in without affecting everything else in the game. The player house and difficulty modes were a good way to go, I thought.

Oh, and I should specify that I hate the concept of interrupts wiping out all progress towards casting a spell, as well. Let it slow me down, sure, but let me pick up where I left off if I'm no longer being hit, or even let me continue at a slowed pace while being attacked if I'm not taking too heavy damage. Let me move while I'm casting something, also taking a hit to my speed, or break in between paragraphs of mystical nonsense to drink a health potion.

My initial thought is that there would be some sort of mana/energy system alongside this that's tied to the standard RPG levelling up mechanism. So yeah, theoretically possible to spam 30 fireballs in a row if you're already an archmage with a huge amount of energy (maybe a global casting time decrease as well as you level?), and have already got fireball down through how much you've practiced it, but not something your average mage will be doing. I like the idea of potions being an option, but I'd like to see a downside for getting overly reliant on them as well. Addiction, or decreasing returns, perhaps?

I really like this idea, but it would indeed be a pain to implement. I could see it working if you opted into it by continually asking a companion what they thought, deferring to their opinion, etc., but someone else taking the control away and making you fight constantly to get it back would be annoying (though a short power struggle and then they back down could still work). My most memorable Dragon Age: Origins playthrough was when I made a mage that I RP'd as a Chantry loyalist; in the absence of the ability to actually make Alistair take charge, as the closest thing to a proper Templar around, I took him around everywhere, paid close attention to what he thought about everything, and made decisions based on what I believed he'd approve of most. And in some ways, it was good for character development that I was forced into the lead role when it made my guy really uncomfortable to be in that position and felt unnatural for him, but if I'd really had the option to put the NPC more in charge, I'd have taken it. One way it could be interesting is with some sort of mentor character at the beginning who starts off in control of your party, and depending on temperament, you can either start trying to take control early on, or be forced into it when they die via cutscene, and have to adapt.

I like the idea of an item with a catch, especially if it's not just a simple "-5 CHA when equipped" that you could balance out with another item or spell, but something that remained a constant risk and required you to factor in the possibility of something negative happening this time (but not that "chance of -1 CHA permanently lost on hit" sort of thing either, that's too costly). Beyond that, I guess I just like any really nice items to be ones I don't have to know about in advance or design my playthrough around to use; sure, Baldur's Gate II had some awesome slings, but I was never that interested in using them with my PC, nor overly fond of Mazzy. So basically I'd say either don't go for a niche item at all, or make in like that one sword in Hordes of the Underdark - lets you tell it whether you want it to be a 2H, 1H, or dagger. Or just go with an accessory that you're sure to have someone who can use!

I'd prefer an energy system over the Vancian system, and agree that cooldowns feel artificial, but I'd actually really like something that takes into account the need to learn still. Never made much sense to me that I'd know perfectly well how to cast Fireball for a year straight, and then because I hadn't picked it for a slot one day, I'd suddenly forget how. That's not how brains work, and if there was some other explanation for what was going on, the games certainly didn't make that clear. In real life, I may have access to a book that I can refer to and use to slowly, say, integrate by parts or whatever, but the more times I refer back and use it and practice, the less I have to use the book until eventually I don't need it at all because the method's understood and memorised. Why not something like that for magic, without going the Morrowind route? Let us start out with a few spells in our party-wide book, find (with a certain selection unavoidable via main quest) or purchase more to add to it, but make improving as a magic user include an element of practice, where the spells are always available, but the cast time for each individual one decreases the more you use it, eventally plateauing. Maybe refine your technique (learn shortcuts, get to recognize commonly used integrals in my maths analogy!) so that they become more powerful or use less energy too. Would be a fun way to really personalise your character and encourage planning for different possibilities, without leaving you completely screwed because you prepared all fireballs today/put all your points in the fire spells/whatever and just ran into a dragon. You've still got that icestorm available, and maybe if you're a little more balanced in your training time/during non-essential fights in future, you won't end up taking quite so much damage because you keep looking at the notes you made on your arm while you're trying to cast.

I liked the way Imoen was handled fairly well, story-wise; I need to get together enough money to reach her, but because of the amount, I have lots of choice in how I do it. Likewise, giving me options for RPing in that I have, say, someone telling me that going off to fight the evil wizard is a really bad idea before I'm more competent, but who won't actually stop me doing so, is good. Fallout 3... not so good. The sense of main plot urgency was always so present that taking any time off to explore or do sidequests felt completely out of character, and not taking the time led to me missing most of the game. New Vegas, I'd have liked more going on in the background while I made my choices on what to do. Not all of it, but maybe that camp full of Legion slaves is actually heading somewhere specific, with stops at night to rest, and if I don't get them on the way, I have to level up for awhile to break them out of somewhere much more populated if I want to. It's probably a lot more writing, but maybe one of those slaves is a potential companion, and whether I pick them up right away or leave them enslaved for a month or so is going to really impact on their personality and fighting style/abilities. Going back to the first example, with Imoen, I'd like it if, say, there were a number of choices for large sidequests to take on before going off to Spellhold, but only time for so many, and the ones you leave, you have to resolve quite differently when you come back. Consequences, replayability, some urgency because the clearly telegraphed main quest is only going to leave you so much time, but nothing major that's actually lost so you end up feeling you can't ever relax and enjoy things. For more minor sidequests, go ahead and put actual timers on them, be a nice change to existing in some hero-centred limbo.

PS:T doesn't make as much sense as BG/BGII in co-op mode, IMO, because tactical combat wasn't as much a focus there. In PE it is, and for the most part, storyline and characterisation is developed during non-combat time. As for resources spent, I don't think most of us are qualified to comment on how much could be added if BG-style multiplayer was left out, and that's sort of crucial information. As it is, I'm for co-op mode, but not if it's at the expense of a significant amount of singleplayer content - and I trust the developers' opinion of what counts as significant.

Illegal black market souls, "I'll trade part of my soul to you if you heal my sick child", soul-brokers hunting down the right kind of souls for interested buyers, populations enslaved and bred for their souls in certain places...

My first experience with multiplayer was with Baldur's Gate. It was also my first RPG, and much too difficult for me at the time. But I controlled the main character, my buddy controlled Imoen (+4 more eventually, until I felt confident enough to take more of them myself), and I persevered! Can't say having someone else playing with me hurt immersion or my enjoyment of the single-player storyline/companions/whatever.

At any time, but also put in special, plot-related killing opportunities when appropriate.

Viconia AND Keldorn. Or rather, companions that'll let you explore themes of prejudice within your own party. Only where you can jump in when one of them's being a jerk, unlike just sitting there while your people murdered each other in the BGs.

I think NPCs being attracted to your PC regardless of their gender is much more believable than NPCs being attracted to your PC regardless of their personality, and increases player choice without sacrificing the important parts of characterization for the NPC. Because 1) I don't find it at all weird that you've got multiple bi people in a group the size of your average party, and 2) the awesome thing about playersexual NPCs is that you can also decide for yourself if you read any of them as straight or gay rather than bi, and play appropriately. For instance, in DA2, the Fenris romance seems less believable to me with a female PC, so I've simply never played it past the first flirt or so.

All structural barriers, certainly not, and I'll certainly agree that the Legion was well done in itself. I think the problem only comes in when a fairly common trait for PCs is such that one of the few main options in the game isn't really available to you because you've got no chance of bypassing any of the barriers, ever, and you'd have to be a complete moron to join up. Your average character is going to be pretty powerful and proactive by the end, not someone who'll just sign on to be enslaved down the road. Keep the unrepentantly racist, sexist factions, but as "minor" factions in terms of the game paths. More Khans than Legion, say.

Yes. BG-style multiplayer was great, and something more games should have; let me pull another person in and we divide up control of the party as we like, then leave it at that.

I'm in favour of romances. But there are a couple things I'd like for them: 1. Make them robust. No "you missed this one necessary flirt line, no romance for you." No "you flirted with someone else, romance ends with no chance to fix things." Let me be able to start one after the usual conversation that'd lead into it has passed. Let me screw things up and be able to apologise, or say I didn't mean it that way, or let me use my awesome magical skills to make them forget they saw me coming out of that brothel, provided that you: 2. Make some things simply unforgiveable to an NPC. Anders in DA2 ending the romance if you sold that kid to the demon was a good example, because it was really obviously something he would never like or be able to get over. If you used blood magic in front of Fenris, the same should've happened unless you had a couple billion points in persuade or used that magic for a decidedly creepy continuation. And furthermore, romances being available shouldn't just be based on some score you have, but on what actions you take, what sort of character you're playing. Maybe even track a bunch of different personality types in the background (cruel, mercenary, protective, forgiving, blah blah blah) that contribute to whether you're attractive to an NPC or not for a full-fledged romance, or whether they'll even be friends with you. I'd like to see companion interaction in general have a lot more depth than "you have enough like points, you get the exact same conversation at this stage that your polar opposite in personality would." If I go around making fun of everyone who talks to me about their problems, I don't care how much I've helped out a companion on personal quests, they're not going to tell me about their dead wife. Liking, trust, and respect for decision-making abilities aren't the same thing, and any realistic portrayal of long-term companions should recognise that and account for it.

Agreed. It was especially impossible for me ever to make a female character that'd side with the Legion; not that I couldn't think of reasons why one would, just that they weren't the sort that resonanted with any female characters I'd ever create, because they generally would make her out to be a victim going along with the stronger, male-dominated society. I want my major options to feel attractive to me both in themselves and because my character thinks they'll make them better (whatever that means for them) both immediately and after the game's ended. Something where you start off, say, as a discriminated-against character helping the racist faction because it's your only option and can later jump ship to something better, or stay because you see hope to change how you're viewed and gain greater rights for yourself/your kind is fine. Knowing that 6 months after the curtain drops on the game your character's going to meet with an unfortunate accident because their success is inconvenient to their faction's philosophy isn't.

6 seems reasonable to me. Too low and you get overly limited on your tactical options, both in battle and out, too high and each individual fight becomes a micromanaging nightmare without something like Dragon Age 2 style tactics (which I actually really loved). But at the same time, one thing I loved about BG was that the system let you take less than the maximum if you wanted, even solo it successfully, as you got better at the game. It was rather annoying that it forced you to stay with the same characters for most or all of your playthrough though, since there was no shared xp. Some sort of hybrid would be nice, where there's a set amount of xp you're getting to be distributed amongst the party members, and you can't just go add a fifth companion for the first time from the starting area 30 hours in and have them be the same level as the rest of you, but if you trade one companion out for another you've already recruited they're on level. It's a bit arbitrary, but it keeps the good points of both systems.