Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Blablachar

  1. What kind of question is that? Ammo should not only take a place in a bag, but it should have a weight as well (real arrows can be heavy as hell). When it comes to the guns- again, not only bullets which we have to buy, but also black powder which we have to manage as well.
  2. A warrior may be a way to go- it's hard to have two shields at once, but if we have a second one in our party with a different gear, together they cover most (or at least greater) number of issues (like different kinds of weapon and monster's immunities for those). The second thing- I never liked in IE games that at some point we have almost unlimited amount of money due to the dozens of armors we sell from our fallen enemies. Eventuallyt shakes the game's economy, we can afford what we like and money is not an issue- it always should be an issue and the motivator (one of many) for doing quests.
  3. Well- it's protective, but when we hit strong enough or pierce it with an arrow (even a chainmail- those didn't stop arrows), it fails to save its user. It's simply more consequence and gear shifting this way- like mentioned by Sylvius, when we face a fire-casting magican, we better not to use wooden shields (but may be effective vs different kind of spells, where the metal one wouldn't be effective). A necessity to choose the right tool for job- always welcome feature.
  4. Still- I find cooldowns a nice feature. About the potions- one of the few games I wasn't reluctant to use potions and I sometimes simply run out of them, was Witcher. These were often a must on the hard difficulty and I realy liked it. So yeah- let potions be quite expensive and rare, also have a certain knockback (toxicity type of thing, lowering the parameters) when used.
  5. For inventory, only tetris like is what I accept fully- the slots like in the IE games are very second. Also- I would like actually not to be able to sell the armor of the fallen enemy- let's say it's destroid due to fight with us and thus worthless. This could also highlight the alternative ways of disposing enemies, like poisoning them in order to keep their armor intact.
  6. I voted for the first one, but with some restrictions- nothing wrong if we are weak in a regular fight as a result, we will have to simply use various of tricks to proceed further, not only rely on speach itself. Mind control as a spell is a good example, hiding in shadows so we can move unnoticed, turning invisible, polymorphing as another person, causing a havoc so we get somewhere during the chaos etc.
  7. I've never done any grinding in any Black Isle or Obsidian title before. Is there a reason you feel compelled to grind levels for unused companions? Because you will have unused companions horrendously underlevelled? Having to constantly switch out companions instead of taking who i want based on their personality or personal stake in a particular quest is what i would classify as grinding. So you do this different quest in the next playthrough, when you stick to this character till the end. I believe in good design, so if anyone wants to join us because of a particular mission, we do it early on (often quickly after meeting the fellow) and decide whether we keep him or not.
  8. 3rd option naturally. We decide on someone so we stick with the person. He dies or leaves- tough luck, we need to take care of some rookie and be extra carefull not to get him killed in further areas.
  9. Are you talking about something like gambit system from FFXII? Rather no- I prefer to use my own tactic, than program the team to behave in a certain way. Plus, if we want many non combat skills and ways to avoid the fight it would be a contradiction then.
  10. 1-4- yes. More options to create such objects, the better- plus extra reason to do side quests and explore in order to find new ingridients.
  11. What kind of question is that? The sole reason the project exists is that we want 90's quality- if anyone is not good with it, then it's a wrong address for him. Even more- let's have even more hardcore in it, with character builds that we can "broke", proper journal and map without gps system, relentless fights and complex system that is demending. Anything less is not good enough :]
  12. But it's barely story relevant. It's no more story relevant than a guy saying "hold on, let me ask my wife, she'd know. I'll meet you back here in an hour." It's no more story relevant than some guy being black and that's that, with his skin color having no plot relevance or story importance other than it just being who he is. So why have it? Really, such homo correctness terrorism is hilarious.
  13. Nope. Well, unless those are teenagers or hyper libido individuals (quite rare though).
  14. This perfectly sums up the issue of romances- none of them then, so this topic butthurrt will end as well.
  15. Because to some people inclusiveness is important. No one is saying the game should be full of obvious gay people. It should be like FONV or Spartacus - in a whole universe of characters, some should be gay. Would you want to play if the game featured no characters like you? Can't you just imagine, that the nameless shopkeeper in the game is gay and that's all? Why do you insist, they should state their preferences anyway? Its impossible not to state it unless you have a genderless game. If you talk to a shopkeeper and he mentions his wife, its stated sexuality. If every character is implicitly straight, that's not really a relatable universe for a gay player. Genderless game? It's impossible not to state? Dude... Why would he mentions his wife? Will he also talk about his sex positions while selling the items?
  16. Because to some people inclusiveness is important. No one is saying the game should be full of obvious gay people. It should be like FONV or Spartacus - in a whole universe of characters, some should be gay. Would you want to play if the game featured no characters like you? Can't you just imagine, that the nameless shopkeeper in the game is gay and that's all? Why do you insist, they should state their preferences anyway?
  17. If there be homo characters, than I want to become the dragon during the game and be able to puryf... burn them to the ground. If dragon option not possible, then no LG and other stupid ideas please.
  18. So yeah- it mostly derives from the idea, that our group of heroes shouldn't be "godlike" and able to cut down enemy armies in a single sweep. In order to survive I believe we should concentrate on wide range of trickery and talking our way out of the though situations (pacifist playthrough included). It's easier to implement in populated areas like towns, but what about dungeons and wilderness? Well, let's say that we have an option to avoid (and gain exp as well) enemy pack, by blocking the road for example (so they can't reach us and are trapped) and setting the floor on fire- in order to do this, we would need for example a very strong team member to block the road and a mage with w fireball spell. It's all contextual action- if we don't have a teammate with high enough strenght and the second one with the fire spell- we can't carry out the mentioned idea and need to resolve to standard fight or other trickery. Or healing the wounded traveler (heal spell necessary) and convincing to go in some direction (high speach or lie) and thus making a bait for a pack of enemies, so we can slip unnoticed out of the tough situation. Not only it would "spicy up" the dungeons exploration, but gave the reason to invest points in some skills, that be unused (or used less) if concentrating on the fighting ones only. What do you think?
  19. I like the generall idea of the first post, I would even go one step further. Let the magic be divided into few (or several) schools that sometimes don't come together- for example, white magic user is able to learn spells from few different schools, but not the black magic because it's a natural contradiction. To make it more interesting, let higher level spells harder to obtain (maybe a little similar to Ultima series)- one would have to find a particular npc in order to learn a spell, make a pact with a demon (for a price- let's say, you have to sacrifice vitality points or stamina), carry out some rituals and kill innocents (black magic stuff), loosing sanity and things like that. Also, nothing wrong with the magic being powerfull, but let it come with some restrictions- want the powerfull lighting strike? Ok, but you have to be in the open area, so no use for it in houses and dungeons. I'm also not a fan of all kind of ressurection spells- it easily brings a lot of logical issues to the game world.
  20. No multiplayer please- as above, rather concentrate on awesome C&C, dialogs and fleshing out the core game.
  21. God No! They haven't made a decent game since first kotor, so no way they could contribute in anyway.
  • Create New...