Jump to content
The Community Blog (An Invitation)

Darkpriest

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1394

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Darkpriest

  1. Darkpriest
    You mad, I loved Khelgar... Personally I strongly disagree people who dislike tropes like this... It's because of the racial concepts that games and characters are believable and how they operate within racial tropes makes them cool (if well written) I do not understand the tendency to dislike the "traditional" representation of certain races. I hated this to no end in NWN Persistent Worlds that everyone and their mother and grandmother and the whole family avoided racial "traditions" and 8/10 players wanted to create social outcasts of that race dealing with some of personal trauma of theirs... which led to players RPing racial concepts more of abnormality than a norm... Sure, once in a while an Outcast can be interesting, but not when it seems like world does not give a damn about their abnormality... I'd rather have companions be representatives of their races and classes, which would make interactions with a player's character more believable.... Say you are a dwarf, and you have a dwarven companion... You do or say something that's way off the cultural scope of the race and your companion tries to set you straight with a snarky comment or you lose "influence" with him/her. Only your PC should be very unique. Companions should be more in attuned to their class and racial backgrounds, but with some own agenda and interesting backstory. To be honest I do not have a companion that I would hate, I simply prefer some over the others based on characters I play. If I was to show one, I would probably choose Anders from DA2 - most annoying from my point of view. From non-companion characters there is one I hate with hellish fire... The ME3 space-god mode-brat... The next on the line is Space Ninja Kai Leng (yup ME3 delivered on the characters I hate)
  2. Darkpriest
    I'm not that into reading all of the details of mechanics, because the main goal for me as a player is to have an enjoyable solution and not big math number crunching. I have enough of numbers in my daily job... The goal of the system: 1) intuitive 2) allowing a big spectrum of viable combat builds (if I'm a -insert weapon- master I want to be able to overcome challenges with the trusty weapon - either add perks that help in that or not too math dependent system) - it leads to FUN. If you want a more realistic system, then I'd rather have a TBC system, not RTwP. Then inventory also should be fairly limited on what you carry (one main weapon - sword, mace, musket, etc.), one side weapon (dagger, knuckles, pistol, etc.), some misc./utility slots, several armor/clothing/jewelry slots, which are locked once the combat starts. If you want to loot everything, then you have to travel with some sort of bought/rented pack mule on which you toss all the heavy stuff, while small things like, gems, money, etc. can be taken by the characters, without the mule you are left with a choice of either leaving the heavy stuff or swapping the one that you have on the one that you've found. The point is: To have fun and intuitive RT(wP) combat it has to be relatively simple yet with some meaningful TACTICAL decisions. I give two nice examples - SC2 from Blizzard, CoH/DoW from Relic. I'd say Relic's RTS games would be a better choice as they are more about terrain control and positioning while Blizzards heavily involve economy and build orders If you want to have more number crunching games, I'd look to TBC system and then as an example would point to X-COM games, both new and old to get the best of two in terms of tactical combat and choice&consequence. As a player I want to enjoy the RP element at the core and the combat be a fluid and fun experience, not a math chore...
  3. Darkpriest
    How I wish someone competent would make System Shock 3... I still recall ending scene from SS2
  4. Darkpriest
    Well, I loved FO1 and FO2... FO3 was real crap to me, even though I bought it... Not sure if I've finished it. Although I recognize the quality improvement on the story line in FO:NV, I couldn't finish it as well... It's just the combat mechanics that puts me away from that game... VATS is hardly usable and the Real Time combat is just bad in FO3 and FO:NV. FPP and action gamey combat background just kills the game for me. On the other hand if on each encounter the camera would pan out and give you the tactical view of the area and TB or RT based tactical combat, where only character skills matter then I would love it. I do like action games, but they have to be real good at that Dark Souls is a good example of a fantasy action game, and say what you want but CoD is a strong brand on shooter side of action gaming, even GoW or ME3 combat is good for an action game. The skills and design of a character and combat skills in Fallout is just not suited for a Real Time FPP action combat... I even do not like TES games because I hate the combat system there + on top of that the storytelling and NPCs suck... I've dropped TES series on Morrowind.
  5. Darkpriest
    I could get behind this. Always wanted to kill that jerk Cyric. I can hardly see this happening, because of the setting that was established... Even allowing The Bhaalspawn to reach godhood would require acknowledgment by WotC and changes to that particular timeline. Given the timeline, I could see only Cyrics defeat as not accomplishing his goal, but never his demise, whereas the Bhaalspawn would get dominion over some portfolio, not necessarily related to the old Bhaal's one. But since it's a no go, I guess I can stop my further theorycrafting
  6. Darkpriest
    Not sure if people have seen this. It's related to the Cyberpunk 2077 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPZxkhLoukI
  7. Darkpriest
    I am not sure how many played the NWN2, but I was for long thinking that someone else is the main villain in the NWN2 OG... with the let down on the MP world building potential compared to the NWN, NWN2 was better in most of the aspects of the RPG...
  8. Darkpriest
    That's why i also sad that i don't want him in PE. Mayby some kind of psychopath actincg simillar but not him. (doesn't fitt in setting) The problem with a psychopath is that unless they are incredibly powerful, it is hard to have one as a villain because they would end up killing all of their followers or screwing up their own plans. Someone calculating and with some measure of self-control makes for a much more effective and believable villain. The powerfull psychopath can be servan of someones stronger and more calculated. Serving him as wardog, or killer etc. It whoud be nice to seeing some plot twist when this type of character break the chain and even atack his old master ... Meh, the servant attacking the master and taking his place has been done quite a bit. Not if he joins your party :D and based on your choices in the game he either betrays you at a least convenient time for you or stays to the end, cause you are 'Fun'
  9. Darkpriest
    If anything the ability to lock it out should be optional, definitely not forced... On Hardcore Ironman, you will probably need that Adventurers hall to "optimize" your party. It's more of a combat skill test than RPG experience in that mode for me.
  10. Darkpriest
    I think that BG series got it right. If you plan to make a series out of this (trilogy?) then do not let us reach the godly powers in the first game.. I won't mind world shattering powers in grand finalle in the third game after hundreds of gameplay
  11. Darkpriest
    Dialog could be partly voiced, like a few first sentences and key plot points/dialogs/party banter, but I would not spend too much time and resources on it, mainly because it costs a lot of money and it is an optional feature, since you can have own "mute" party members created in adventurers' halls, and there is also the scale of the world and number of NPCs that you may interact with. I am replaying now IWD and BG series, (with Torment being on halt in mid game), and the amount of voice acting is just enough there.
  12. Darkpriest
    Looks solid and "fun friendly" on paper. I cannot wait for fist in game shots even if pre-alpha stages to get the sense of it!
  13. Darkpriest
    This is a no braienr, obv, best of both aka 3rd option
  14. Darkpriest
    lawful does not mean to abide the laws of the land, if the laws are unlawful in view of the "greater picture" (which in DnD have specific alignments) then the paladin fallows only his code... that's the lawful thing for him. The code of the order, the vows, the virtues of his god
  15. Darkpriest
    well papal knighthoods were bascially warriro monks, but were using armor and weapons like other knights... it just might be other way
  16. Darkpriest
    Sounds more like Lawful Stupid than Lawful Good. Characters like that are just annoying. My thoughts exactly, but the worst part was that most of it was enforced by the rules. it was not enforced, it was simply misunderstood by players I would guess... LG Paladin does not equal stupid character or straight up lawful stupid
  17. Darkpriest
    Paladins are a concept that is derived from knighthood, but in service of the god before the king/queen. Templars could be probably nearest RL "popular" example
  18. Darkpriest
    So you'll name a random troll in game McManusaur? So we can kill it with fire?
  19. Darkpriest
    They had different views because then, a luxurious sedentary lifestyle was an all but unimaginable dream for the majority of people. Fat was a sign of being well off, and not having to work hard. Now, that's the norm, and having the time/money to buy healthy food and work out is a sign of success. So while some fat may have been considered attractive, that was exactly because it was not seen on the kind folks we're likely to be playing as in PE. Also, obesity was associated with gluttony and laziness practically since the beginning of time. When people say that fat was attractive, they're talking about slightly chubby sculptures and paintings, not what modern Americans consider "fat". I get the sense the OP is a member of the anti chainmail bikini crowd. If "realism" is really at all important, characters who travel the country by foot and fight all day long should be pretty goddam fit. Are we talking about fat or clinically obese people? That said, I do not see why some NPCs or even one of companions, like a cleric/mage/cipher or similar should not be chubby/fat?
  20. Darkpriest
    Dude... you have a modern look at the fat people... Get into some medieval cultural aspects, which had a bit different view on this...
  21. Darkpriest
    3rd option... No and even more of a NO... MMO = lack of quality in the narrative part...
  22. Darkpriest
    God no. There's a reason that crap has been left in the dust. The character needs believable motivations, otherwise i don't give two ****s about him. I'd prefer this not to turn into something as morally black and white as Star Wars. I won't agree... Usually what drives to be a villain is usually power, greed, revenge... - some just have their agenda fairly simple. It's not always the goal or reason that makes a villain great... It's THE PERSONALITY... Still the morality can be black and white, and not make the villain pale and unimaginative. Wasn't main BG2 villains agenda a simple revenge? Yes it was. And when Bioware tried to deviate from this bland character motivation, we got Loghain. A character i believe to be far better in every way. That's not to say revenge can't be done well, it just hasn't been done without the usual mustache twirling and kitten kicking tropes in games. I find Loghain's actions stupid, but each to his own. I preferred Jon Irenicus' actions, as they fitted him better given his agenda, thus I find that character more coherent and in the end result better. Loghain had the potential but they screwed him badly by bad scenario.
  23. Darkpriest
    God no. There's a reason that crap has been left in the dust. The character needs believable motivations, otherwise i don't give two ****s about him. I'd prefer this not to turn into something as morally black and white as Star Wars. I won't agree... Usually what drives to be a villain is usually power, greed, revenge... - some just have their agenda fairly simple. It's not always the goal or reason that makes a villain great... It's THE PERSONALITY... Still the morality can be black and white, and not make the villain pale and unimaginative. Wasn't main BG2 villains agenda a simple revenge? (I might be overusing this, but it is a great example of 80s art) - check this episode of RoS. While the motives can be fairly simple the personality of the sheriff is just great. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wha5YXUj-uo&feature=relmfu
  24. Darkpriest
    Exactly ... and most of the wealthy classes weren't tramping all over creation adventuring either ... they tended to stay in their big castles eating and staying out of the sun ... maybe we could add a litter with bearers for the fat characters in the game ... or the Asics of Speed for the really thin ones That's why most of the fat people were among nobility, clergy and later wealthy merchants/guild masters, hence I would not mind seeing such NPCs. As for adventurers I can certainly see a sort of mage/cipher/cleric or other class, who is not mainly a weapon master, as a heavier than average. This reminds me of a great episode of Robin of Sherwood: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=R-I6UfJjttU Seeing a "fat" king Richard I Lionheart still owning in wrestling The Little John
  25. Darkpriest
    Well technically in medieval times fat people were considered "attractive", because usually that meant wealthy as well... See baroque art for that as an example. Same as the pale white skin was desired (In Europe for example France, etc), because tan meant you are from lower classes as you work in the sun, etc.
×
×
  • Create New...