Elerond

Games don't have random combat in them. As even random encounter are designed to be in the game. So if they decide to create random encounter to their level they will also decide reason why it is there and what reward player will get from getting through of that encounter. So if game uses objective based xp, level designer will be aware of this fact and therefore they design reward for their designed level using game's rewarding system. For example a lazy way to design a random encounter would go something like this: Decide where and how often random encounter can occur: For example 20% change when player moves from dock to marketplace in city What the encounter will be: For example player encounter band of five ruffians Ways to solve encounter: For example Kill ruffians or die Rewards and punishments from the encounter: For example 100 XP and loot if survive and if die player must reload How world will react to encounter: For example it will not. In objective based xp system player would get 100 xp after combat is over In xp per kill based system player would get 20 xp per killed ruffian Both systems work in this scenario similary. But if you want make encounter more difficult on harder difficult level, but you don't want give more xp for player. Then there will start to become difference in this systems. For example in objective based system you could easilly add 5 ruffians to encounter or change ruffians to higher level ruffians and you don't need to do anything else as xp gain don't change. But in per kill based system if you add ruffians you need to lower how much xp player gets from per ruffian and this can cause problems in other levels what you have not designed if you don't add your own ruffian type in the game and same goes for higher level ruffians as they probably in default would give more xp, so you need to fix that also. That is why in my opinion balancing encounter is much easier when you can put fixed xp for them instead to calculate how many kills or tasks your encounter will have and how xp should be divided so that player will get that xp ammount what you want him or her to get from the encounter.

I add my humble thanks for LordCrash in the choir

Big part of good story is verisimilitude and suspension of disbelief. Because if you can't empathize to story you don't usually care about it.

I would say that pure objective base sytem will make deciding to use raw force with out any trickery more valid option. As often player/character is punished if s/he don't use sneak or diplomatic options as they reward usually more experience than combat option, so player usually go around this fact by using first either sneak or diplomatic option and in some rare cases they can do both before they will use combat option to ensure that they will not lose any xp when they decide to use combat option. Or sneaky character gets key to locked door via diplomatic means and then s/he will lockpick door after all, because s/he will get additional xp reward by doing so. These are bugs in level design caused by task based xp sytem and they will sunk level designers orginal ideas about which solutions should give greatest xp rewards and which should give better rewards in other sectors as player can achive them all. And usually when level designers tries to answer to this design problem they often relay on railroading that forces player his or her choosen solution. Objective based xp gives often more easier answer to this design problem as player will only get xp from solution which s/he used first. Of course this don't remove all kinks from the reward allocation but it make level designing easier. This is of course only my opinion which is based to my own experiences.

That probably depends on which version of game you take. If you take Steam version you will get it to Windows, Linux and Mac OS (utility feature) If you take GoG version you will get it at least for Windows and Mac OS (utility feature) Other distribution version there is not yet information (except that you can use physical copy as DRM-free or include licence from it to your Steam account).

Another game which has where I love very much about atmospheric sounds was Darklands and how they used music and sound make cities and towns feel alive and medieval even as they were only 2d images and dialog menus. Betrayl at Krondor uses similar approach successfully also.

Vampire: The Masqurade - Bloodlines Game had fantastic atmospheric sounds overall but one level come mind overall Ocean House where excelent atmospheric sound make eerie looking manor to change wondreful horror experience Here is youtube link to one walkthrough, but I had hard time to find one where sound quality is even decent and there is no commentary.

Let Rambo tell you which is better, bow or guns http://vimeo.com/40709487

So you don't think you'd become more experienced at fighting if you were ambushed? You don't think you'd learn anything at all from it? You believe you'll only learn from doing things that have a good reason to be done, and as a consequence, the concept of "Practice" is pointless since you cannot become more experienced by engaing in that exercise since it doesn't have a good reason? The biggest problem in this thread is that people are not stating what their reason is for not wanting experience from combat, and I'd imagine that's because if there was full disclosure the reasons wouldn't hold up well to cross examination. experience points and experience leves are abstractions, which hide how and where characters get their knowhow to do things. And when those things are abstracted then it also quite logical that gaining experience is also abtracted, which means that objective based experience will probably work better than task based as in objective based sytem game master or designer has more easier time to point out when your character has gained enough experience to get some advance from it. Although I think that surviving from ambush is pretty good objective. But in systems that use straigth skill development (meaning that if you use a skill it gets better) it is more logical to use task based experience gain than objective based. This are of course only my opinions about subject.

I loved how Darklands handled this issue. It would be nice if Obsidian implements character creation system where you can choose to go world as noob who is eager to learn new things or maybe as old man who has decades of experience from different occupations but don't anymore learn things fast and his physical condition starts to drop. This of course is probably much harder to balance between races thant have different lifespan and using xp level system instead skill development system, but still it could be nice feature. http://darklands.wikispaces.com/age http://darklands.wikispaces.com/Character+creation

Problem with PE and consoles is usually minimalistic graphic memory in consoles. As large (15360x8640 from 6x6 screen map [used in IE games] where one screen is 2560x1440) 2d background consume lot of graphic memory. And when you add enviromental animations and 3d characters and objects consoles just run out of graphic memory. So to get game to run on consoles backgrouds and background animations must be renered on smaller size (which means lose of details) or game must use partial loading technics that cause map to flow unsmoothly or slowly and this can also cause need to change how pathfinding and etc. things work. PE will not probably cause high load to cpu or gpu, so prosessing power will not, probably, be a problem. Then there is of course problem of point and click and paint and select interface solutions, as they are not perfect for console controller, but are optimal for mouse. And of course keyboard will over lot of shortcut keys, when console interface much be developed so that skill/spell/talent/menu/map/journal/window/inventario/etc. selection are fast to do with few clicks from the controller. So for optimal gaming experience, consoles and pc need separate interfaces. And then there is of course testing which console version would add considerably Then there is of course that fact that PE will need quite much harddrive space, so it will not fit in OUYA's 8 GB, and it will be too big for Xbox live or PSN. And physical distribution for consoles is expensive and difficult for indie studio to do in first place.

Gameplay balances what we have seen in past AD&D full plate is best and one would use it, but some classes can't use it or it blocks usage of class specific abilities. D&D 3.0 and 3.5 put limit to dexterity bonus, some classes must take feat to be able to use one and it restricts some class specific abilities DAO, full plate causes abilities to use more combat resource and armours have minimium strength requirement to character to wear them. And in all of these games full plate is rare and expensive and it weight more than other armours. In all of these settings reason for not to use full plate come from realism or world inner logic.

From that this come in mind

Yes and no. Yes because strong emergence says that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. And no because reductionism says that a complex system is nothing but the sum of its parts, and that an account of it can be reduced to accounts of individual constituents.

They mean with previous tier, previous physical tier, which is $140. And that list in obsidian tumblr page should be most specific about what each tier includes as they say on PE's kickstarter's homepage that one should look complete reward list from there.

Excelent story companied with good gameplay mechanics in intresting and believable world added with elements of exploration, discovery and heroism/villianism and all this must be paced with appropriate rate of action, story telling, character development and threat. This of course is when we speak about fantasy rpgs.

http://project-etern...ty-reward-tiers Hope this helps

Video of study made in University of Leeds limitations imposed by full plate And here is study it self http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/07/15/rspb.2011.0816.full

Some logic will help usually when you think which claims have basis in reality and which are probably fiction. For example, why people would use armour that don't really protect against one of common weapons on battlefield and which causes them lose much of their ability to fight and which is also most expensive armour in market? And one thing what people also should remember about full plates is that there were battle, ceremonial and jousting version of them. Jousting version of full plates were much heavier and they didn't had same agility as battle and ceremonial versions. Example about jousting armour Example of battlefield version of full plate

When every class in the game has magic, so I don't see why one class should have special restrictions what to wear so that it can cast spells. And removing equipment restrictions don't make wizard as fighter, because even if you can wield sword, it don't mean that you know how to use it. And wearing heavy armour don't make you immortal even if you are wizard. And those who say that wiards should not have armours, because of their protective magic, you should probably read what Josh said about that in his update. Wizards magic is not effective against bullets, which is reason why some wizards in PE's world wear plate armour. And in melee wizard with plate armour will probably lose to fighter who has more skill with sword and can magically enchant his speed and strength. And rogue who can make him or her self to be invisible and insubstantial has great advantage against wizard who focus more to combat than his or her spells. So removing equipment restrictions don't destroy balance between classes when classes are different from what you have seen in D&D.

Here not so good video that show how well stanard 15th century crossbow penetrates armour

That's not how I understood it, do you have a source please? In Health and stamina systems update's thread Josh gives this example http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61533-update-24-less-than-30-hours-to-go-life-and-death-and-audio-cd-soundtrack/page__st__20?do=findComment&comment=1241994

Or not impregnate her and die hero's death as one should. This ending is especially good when you have slaughterd all companions on the way except Morrigan and of course you have destroyed elves in forrest and city, drive dwarfs in civil war, let undead kill most of the Redcliff and killed jarl's son and wife. So you were absolute true hero

Character takes damage to health and stamina from every hit. Stamina don't protect character from health lose.

Long-sword meant any sword with long cutting blade Bastard sword refered to irregular swords or swords of uncertain origin Great Sword is modern term that which don't has any historical preference. But Scottish Claymore in it's Gaelic form (claidheamh mor) means literally great sword, but it was hand and half sword. German's had Zweihänder which literally means two-hander and is sword type what people usually mean when they speak about great swords. So dividing swords to these three types can be very difficult time to time, as there is no specific specs what sword should have that it could be put in one.