evdk

The answer is: Yes.

Maximum creepage.

@BetrayTheWorld Listen, if they do all these little streamlining changes so that the wider gaming audience might find their game more palatable, then there need not be no PE2 as far as I am concerned, because it would mirror the Standard AAA Franchise Ruination Process . In fact, I possibly wouldn't even care if PE itself sees the light of the day in that case and they can keep my money - it would be a well taught lesson for me.

That's... not what would in all probability happen. Think more meltdown.

Boy talk about needing tags for dialoge options - I never saw that one coming... I on the other hand have been fairly certain of the intent of my sentence and hold it as a triumph of tag-less design :D

I stand by my claim that if you use bluff this way in your D&D game I would like to have a few words with your DM, using a chair leg for punctuation.

Worst case scenario: Use the good old (Lie) tag.

Call me when they actually use such interpretation.

But if what you are functionally doing is being Intimidating then you are using Intimidation. The hell take the intent, it just is not the correct use of the bluff skill. If I was your DM I would let whoever you were trying this on eat you and use your bones as fertilizer. Even if it was just a little old lady. Especially if it was just a little old lady.

That's inexcusably bad dialogue writing. And a horrendous quest mechanic. All I'm hearing is "That's Bioware".

I never said it SHOULD be used in place of anything? If the game includes both skills then it's apples and oranges - some games link them to totally different attributtes - they are what they are - use them as you see fit within the rules of the game - don't like it? Make your own game and leave it out... I don't think it will be in this one, so I save myself the wasted effort. And I understand they are two different skills, I just do not believe they overlap, precisely because they are two different skills tied to two different attributes. They definitely do not overlap in case of intimidation.

Dear Jesus, don't make me quote myself: Sorry thats just silly... intimidate is a skill - a skill is a game mechanic - when it's used the game performs some function with it - the game doesn't know it's a threat it just knows it's a skill that requires some function to determine if it is successful or not. bluff is a skill - a skill is a game mechanic - when it's used the game performs some function with it - the game doesn't know it's a threat it just knows it's a skill that requires some function to determine if it is successful or not. The fact that you don't think a threat should be bluffed in this context is irrelevant to all but you... Bluff is a bloody superfluous skill that should be burned, banned and forgotten. Exactly because of stuff like this, when people try to argue that it should be used instead of pretty much any other skill.

Dear Jesus, don't make me quote myself:

Unfortunately the only way for this to work would be to clone MCA.

Then rejoice, for so is Sawyer.

That was a complete quest. Because, you know, conspiracy.

7.5? I'll try harder next time. Hey, this is not IGN, 7.5 is pretty good. You do not have to score 9+ all the time, that's reserved for the true masters.

Looks like it's time for Operation Barbarossa Part 2 Jetzt ist es persönlich.

Why? Do you think that every person who likes these styles of RPGs is exactly like you, or fits into a nice, neat little package that you can point at and say "Yep, that's a roleplayer." ??? I'm a former college athlete, and also a certified genius. I don't look like what you'd expect the stereotypical roleplayer to look like, nor do I act like it. However, I've played RPGs for about 20 years. I enjoy them. And earlier in life, I enjoyed more difficult games. But I have a job, a house, car payments, etc. I don't have as much time to dedicate to gaming as I used to. I don't mind more challenging aspects being available, but gaming isn't just something children with no responsibilities do these days. There are plenty of people with more demands on their time who enjoy playing games. Options. Options is where it's at. Let players customize their experience to the difficulty level they feel is appropriate. And for the record, adding "No offense" to the beginning of a sentence does nothing to mitigate an offensive comment. For example: "No offense, but you're a moron. No offense, but you're a fat, ugly slob who lives in his mother's basement." You see? It makes no difference. If anything, it makes it worse. Your comment leads me to believe that you think you know what people should play what games, and that certain people simply -shouldn't- play them. But the fact is, companies make games because they want people to play them. They want a LOT of people to play them. And while the jumpstarter project has allowed them to create a game that is not wholly constricted by the projected financial earnings of the evil empire's accountants, I assure you that they still want to make money. So telling people, or insinuating to people that they -should not- play this game because they don't share the same opinions as you is not only short-sighted, but likely unwelcome by the devs themselves. Best rant I've read in a while. Bonus points for using the phrase "certified genius". Do send my regards to Mensa. All in all 7.5/10

NEVER EVER EVER use bluff like this. EVER. Because this way you can try to justify using bluff for anything and this way lies madness. I don't care If you truly mean to feed your target feet first to a crocodile or if you've never intended to go through with your threat, it is still a threat and as such a use of the Intimidate skill. NEVER.

If you ever played BG or NWN in MP you'll never say that this is "waste of resources". But I haven't, so I will.

Easy. You pick the line which you feel your character had the highest probability to say at that moment and stick with it. You either roleplay, or use your own morality, whichever you prefer. The point you seem to be missing it that when a line is going to use (or not use) a skill my character may posess or not posess that as a player I should be notified of that in order to choose which option is most appropriate for my character. Choosing to use or not use a skill during dialoge is no different than choosing which weapon or spell to use in combat and whether or not you wish to make that choice in order to roleplay the character or ROLLplay the character is immaterial - you still need to know if you are just making a dialoge choice that will bring the same scripted response regardless of who makes it or making a choice to use a skill to determine the result - if my wisdom or lockpicking or healing knowledge abilities are going to be used to determine the end result of some of the choices in a particular dialoge but not other choices then I want to be aware of that. Yes you can make them hidden and just have the effects be random and some people might find it fun to play that way but I have graduated from blind mans bluff and pin the tail on the donkey and prefer a little more cerebral approach to my gaming choices today. What so there should be options like "Tell me or I'll break you ****ing legs, you miserable whoreson" and "(Intimidate)Tell me or I'll break you ****ing legs, you miserable whoreson"" side by side, both with different outcomes? Because I still do not see why would you need the bloody tags otherwise.

The tags can't be ON be default because the dialogue has to written as though they weren't there. If the tags being present is the default state then their removal might truly make the dialogue unusable. No offense, but this game might not be for you then. Although this whole discussion is academical, since toggle for tags was confirmed by Josh, so unless he changes his mind...

And yet games before this one mysteriously managed this feat.