Darkpriest

Seriously, literature contains more than a few examples of great characters that are fat. One of most renown should be Friar Tuck from the Robin Hood... I would seriously not mind seeing a fatty cleric, cipher, whatever...

Pff... Who would not like to have a Friar Tuck as a companion? I dare you!!!

Would you rather have another chainmail bikini or romance thread? This might be somewhat productive in a tangible manner (as in, saving some cash in the end result) if people with the actual experience in this field can benefit for no cost at all

That's why I was pointing out, that you should be able to prove that you have an obligation arising from the said cash collection - I'm just not 100% sure that the deferred revenue would be the best place to put the liability into. If it works, then all the better as it's simpler to document and maintain. BTW, the most conservative/safest of options is to pay taxes on anything you do, but that's not the best way of running a profitable business

@Aeristal I do not believe it is a matter of revenue recognition here, but more of the nature of the fund raise - i.e. is it a donation that is taxable or is it a cash inflow with obligations attached that would allow to treat these items as "restricted cash" and "liability" (which arises from contractual obligations). The revenue recognition would apply if that was a pre-order - which is a bit different than what we have with the KS. PS. I'd really like to see someone from US, who is actually working with US GAAP and US Tax on daily basis to get involved here I have a broad knowledge of US GAAP, but it is certainly not my main focus.

This is where transparency of the company's development process comes to mind. If I am left with the feeling that everything is going well and then in mid 2014 I get a message that we are running out of funds and we are half-way through, then I would start be suspicious about the actions taken by the developer. If however during the development cycle there will be transparency about stages of development, I have no problems with the product getting delayed or even reasonably cut of some features that turn out to be too expensive and would significantly exceed the budget limits. The prime condition is this - use the fund raise ONLY to the PRODUCTION of the title, which will meet the obligation of delivery of pitched product. The Key features which have to be in the product are on The KS pitch - including the stretch goals. Everything else is a subjective expectation of each of us, but it does not mean that it has to be met from my perspective, as long as it delivers the features set forth in the KS pitch. If I will feel unsatisfied, I will simply be more cautious with the future funding, but at no point I will be able to claim that the product did not deliver the features that were mentioned in the pitch... It will be like in case of pre-ordered Bioware games - I cannot say they have no features that were promised, I can only be disappointed because the delivery of features was not as I was expecting them to be. EDIT: As per tax issues, perhaps they can document the raised funds in the "Restricted cash" category? Maybe that can help in documenting that as a non taxable item, until delivery of products? (with the liability on the Balance Sheet) Nature of Restricted Cash Restricted cash arises out of a management decision to set aside funds because of, say, a legal obligation such as a statute or court order, or based on contractual requirements. For example, a company could elect to set aside a certain amount each month for the repayment of debt. This cash would be considered restricted and available exclusively to extinguish the debt. A company's earmarked cash would be aggregated to calculate the total restricted cash balance.

Still waitin'....

The impression I get is that Kickstarter will avoid responsibility in the event of disputes: Link. From the Kickstarter FAQ: It is the responsibility of the project creator to fulfill the promises of their project. Kickstarter reviews projects to ensure they do not violate the project guidelines, however Kickstarter does not investigate a creator's ability to complete their project. Are developers legally obligated to complete their project? Yes. Kickstarter's Terms of Use require creators to fulfill all rewards of their project or refund any backer whose reward they do not or cannot fulfill. (This is what creators see before they launch.) We crafted these terms to create a legal requirement for creators to follow through on their projects, and to give backers a recourse if they don't. We hope that backers will consider using this provision only in cases where they feel that a creator has not made a good faith effort to complete the project and fulfill. My best guess would be that you'd have grounds for a class action lawsuit. Some other concerns: is over funding good? Haunts: The Manse Macabre I'd hate to see the Haunts guys sued or anything. Sometimes crap happens and it sounds like it did for them Well, these two points for me apply the obligation on the KS pitcher (in this case Obsidian) to deliver the product to the crowd that funds this project. We are not anonymous, but I might see a point where this can be a bit muddy. (for example at no point there was an official ID verification, which usually is required from the legal perspective) I'm not either (I don't even live in the US), but I imagine it's a heck of a muddy water territory with projects that are overfunded. Say you ask for $100,000 and you end up getting $10 million!. Even if you need to use a significant chunk of that to deliver rewards, there's no way that that company is giving those awards away at cost. Is this not effectively fulfulling preorders and effectively just a different type of selling? For many people (myself included), I contribute because I'm getting something in return. Kickstarter also requires an applicant's tax information (created via Amazon) in order to create a kickstarter account to start projects. I think it's best to go into Kickstarter with money that you are perfectly okay with never seeing any return from ever again. IMO I understood all the risks with backing something like PE and WL2, and understand that my contribution may never amount to anything material. Yes, we are ok. with the money to not be returned if no fraudulent action took place with the money we threw at the project and the contributor of the fund raise can give a solid proof that all the money went on the production process of the said project. It is... quirky... but I believe that a complete budget document, that documents all the planned production costs plus rewards costs in order to deliver the pitched product to the backers, would be enough in terms of proof. Unless there would be some unusual expense categories (i.e. too big variation from the usual market price), that should be fairly solid. Per the obligation (as I understand it) set forth in the KS, they cannot put the extra cash as their pure distributable income, that would boost their bottom line and as a result could also be part of a dividend payout if they did nothing in their current fiscal year. Again, perhaps the US Tax rules have some special rules for such situations, but I think that it may be a simple money grab by the IRS, because I do not think that any KS pitcher would spend thousands of USD for top tier tax advisory. I've learned that a good documentation and reasoning can get you through a lot of so called "muddy waters". The KS and Amazon already take a lot of money as it is Of course the extra leftovers from the fund raise should be a subject to a tax, but only when the obligations towards the backers would be met.

Why is there a liability attached? Is the obligation enforced? How is it monetized? What restrictions are there from stopping someone from raising several million dollars and putting out a hack game that required only a fraction of the cost. There is an obligation to deliver a product which is pitched in the KS and to which you raise the funds. From what I understand from KS mechanics it is. The third one is more tricky, but basically a production budget with stretch goals + estimated cost of the rewards could be a proof for the value of the obligation Lastly, if they can deliver a product with the fraction of the funds they gathered then that will be their profit AFTER the products, which create liability to benefactors, will be delivered to supporters. I am no US Tax specialist, so if you know the rules better, I'd be grateful to look into the reasoning why would this be treated as a taxable income.

I'm fairly sure that it won't be taxable, because: a) The fund raise has obligations attached, which need to be fulfilled b) There was no "sales conditions" met per US GAAP c) It's not a donation, see point a) IMO it's a cash inflow with a liability attached, purely a BS (Balance Sheet) transaction. Basically until they will have a product ready, all their transactions will be mostly BS related, including salaries for the production team members (which will be later recognized as CoGS) - At least that's my assumption. I did not work in game industry and perhaps there are some interpretations of Accounting rules specific to that industry, that I am not aware of. In short, the cash inflow from KS SHOULD NOT be taxable. Unless there are some legal conditions in KS agreement that treat the fund raise as a donation from a tax related perspective, it should be safe. EDIT: I treat KS as a fund raise with obligations, because donation would mean that we have no control over the use of money, and KS obligates the beneficiary to use the funds to deliver a promised product. There is a chance that we might not see the product, but it only has no legal repercussions for the beneficiary of the fund raise, if he used all the money from the fund raise on the delivery of the project but it felt short on cash to complete it or other unpredictable conditions arose.

Depends how magic works and if counterspelling is available + ward type of spells. The save-or-be-screwed type of spells should be in game (immobilize, die, etc.) but the abilities should be logical for "localization and enemy type involved". If you are entering some old wizard's tower, then you'd better have some death wards and counter-spelling ready. If you are out in the wilds and get ambushed by some bandits, it might be good to have some "freedom" type of spell available + some CC type of spell of your own. As long as these spells/abilities are logically attached to a power level of a foe we might expect to see, I have no issues with them... It's part of the TACTICAL experience to be prepared for such encounters.

Personally I would not mind it to be done in a similar way to Wasteland 2, but the hand crafted art, which is 2,5D can also look great as one of the pics showed.

You are new to the forum, aren't you? Yup, I surely am. Has the topic been discussed before? If you point me in the right direction I'd be grateful. Discussed is a light word... it's been hammered to death and then some... just in case...

I like the idea of progression in various armor types. I would say that it looks good, but there are two things that HAVE TO be considered: 1) Obviously the balancing factor - fatigue? stamina drain? mobility? attack speed? damage resistance? 2) Complexity - While I'd like the system to be more fleshed out, it is an easy trap to go way into a tedious job for a player in the end result. Some of the ideas presented here would be more in line with armored combat simulator than a medieval based fantasy GAME. I know we have on the forums different preferences to many things, but the people playing these kinds of games are not always hardcore PnP RPG players. That should be taken into account when designing armor properties. Remember that it was not the complex mechanics that made the IE games great, so lets not burden the game with overly complicated mechanic systems. On the enchantments side - definitely for base armor value I'd rather have different descriptions, while all other magical properties can be included in whatever adjective or custom name you want to put if the only bonus is a +1 to armor class, then I'd rather see it as a different material name.

What if it has 2 suns and 3 moons?

Pfft, screw that. Don't even give us any journal at all, a REAL old school game should require you to keep your own journal with a pen and paper. Don't have an area map either, we should have to draw our own. I also want the inventory to be like the old Ultima games where every party member has dozens of bags and you need to keep track of which items are in which bag on which party member. Automatic sorting is for lazy, illiterate wimps! REAL roleplayers need it not! I sincerely hope that it's sarcasm... I do like PnP experience and I would not mind having the FULLY MANUAL journal as an option... but that said.. it should be an OPTION... The one thing that can cause a lot of frustration is not not be able to follow a quest line without a massive WORK... Work is rarely fun... I would love to see old school journal entries style, BUT modernized in a way, where they would be grouped per quest name (like that said Red Ruby). Don't impose WORK on players as a default and the only true experience... I doubt that majority would consider that a FUN way of looking for completion of quests.

Um, what? Sorry but I love a hard game as much as the next person, but if there is multiple play types like insane/hard/normal/ and EASY, then you kind of expect easy to be..um...easy? Have you played the game? I know quite a few who said the same thing before they played it and after they played it their attitudes changed quickly. Dude... I have not lost a soldier on Normal Ironman.... I rarely get my soldiers killed on Classic... you have to do some things really bad... and what you say about saves is either lack of knowledge or a lie... I've played also regular Classic and I can save game mid game and restore to that position (in-missions) even if my soldiers die... - only Ironman disables that.. perhaps you ticked that option as well? Ironman toggle is just above the Tutorial switch at the start of the game... You do know that Ironman is a mode of the game, not an actually difficulty level?

AP is one of the best RPGs, really.. I have only a one complain.. the timed response on the dialog wheel. Other than that it is an excellent game.. I have never experienced any bug with it, so for me all those things were odd to see when people said it's bug ridden. I've playd different styles, the silent stalker with a lot of stealth and an outright commando plus on top of that you had excellent NPCs with personalities... I really would love to see a similar game in the future... Obs... create a spin of - spiritual successor of AP :"D (like Black Isle did with Wasteland and created Fallout )

Well, BG1's journal was hell if you took a break for a week or so, and had to come back and remember what to do. They can definitely impove upon that, without adding quest markers or active quests as you say... but they do need to log them per quest for easy access. Especially useful for those longer quests (the entire stronghold section, eternal dungeon etc.) I think it's not a bad design idea to implement a "real" journal like a diary. It's a choice between immersion and "casualization". A good RPG should be a comparable experience to reading a good book - with the one difference that you can decide about the direction of the story and the results of your actions. But like a book you will (and should!!!) "fall out" of the world if you quit it for a week or a month. The most dense and emotional experience can only be reached when you follow the whole thing in a relatively close timeframe. And if you are forced to quit the game for a longer time you should also be forced (by the game) to work you in again. While I understand your point of view, I also would like this game to succeed beyond the Kickstarter campaign and be a sales hit, that will sell 2-4 mln copies. Quests, while can be done without "arrow" indicators and other strictly hand holding stuff, they should be well organized and easy to reach by a player. Going too far with the hardcore mode, where you would have to collect info by yourself, could be too much. I would not mind it to be toggable (i.e. by default you get organized quest journal, but you might switch it off, so you have to keep all the notes manually). I'd prefer a default journal to be modernized, i.e. we get a name of the quest "Red Ruby" - and there you start with journal entries related to this quest, saying that one said it's most dear to his heart, etc and eventually finding out that it's a redhair girl called Ruby...

I have no issue with people who can read AND understand what the figures in FS might represent given the specifications of a business model, but I am sure that vast majority has little to no understanding of such things and that alone might drive misconceptions and misunderstanding. The more global level of simple things, like cash acquired vs cash pledged and then providing the estimation of "rewards and shipment" that Kickstarter tiers included would be a good idea, only if to verify our assumptions on the total fund available for the project. Breaking down a figure of around 3,2-3,4mln USD into more details is pointless though. The benefit vs potential questions, that would in large be unanswered, is just marginal. We really do not need to start seeing threads, why money goes for that, or this, etc. If you are really interested in the financial background, you probably would do best via PMing Adam or whomever else is responsible for the OE Finance.

PS:T had some nice touches, also NWN2 had some creativity with the ending. I wish they would put more time into those things back in NWN2

Yes, modernized means exactly that, so the journal entries are grouped into "quest hubs", but it still reads and is updated like the BG journal, so you get the inital info "i talked with this and that, and decided, bla bla bla", the resolutions of quests and rejections of quests would also be reflected as in character journal entries. The second option is for those who prefer to have full control on what their PC is talking AND writing, so their character does not have personal notes and quests are shown only as objectives. I prefer the "modernized" BG style even if it somewhat adds own personality to the character Not sure what exactly the third option would be, which you hinted at. Do you mean that you'd like to see some automatic notes in some separate "story journal" where the text appears based on some checkpoints/achievements, but quest journal looks like pure objective based?

I hope the poll says it all Are you more into in character journal entries, or more into strictly objective based quest journal?

well let's estimate: 4,1mln - 10% that's roughly 3,7, then deduct all the physical stuff that needs to go as rewards and you go into ranges of 3,3 - 3,4. (you need to deduct all the shipping costs for physical stuff, purchasing of physical goods, etc.) 3mln would rather low IMO... 700k for non-production would be a lot... Around 400k - with all the transports + physical goodies like loot bag, etc. seems reasonable.- there is roughly 13k people that pledged any form of a physical reward, so let's average the cost (including shipping) at 40 USD. - seems to be fairly possible.

I'd prefer TB, but I can choke up the RTwP... TB usually is better in terms of tactics and planning. While I like games like DotA, I love games like X-COM I also find it that TB can be visually superior, because animations are easier to be defined and synced. Recent examples - XCOM: EU, and Age of Decadence which is in works (although it's not the same detail level as XCOM, due to far lower budget)