Umberlin

That's what they were in the D&D v3 rules... very good mage killers, distinguished from "normal" fighter by four main features: Powerful unarmed attack Excellent unarmed AC Improved evasion feat that allowed them to usually avoid area effect damage from spells such as fireball Excellent magic resistance (at least at higher levels) And I think a "mage killer" class should really exist in any RPG that has powerful magic users, so for those wondering why there should be a Monk class rather than adding Paladin/Bard/Witch/Lawyer/Janitor/whatever classes first, I'd say that's why. They already did the anti-mage idea with the guns piercing magical defenses.

I always liked the idea of mentalist/psionic styled characters. They're rarely done well, and tend to end up as mind mages (I throw mind blasts instead of fireballs!) more than, "I mess with your head in dialogue to amusing effect" which, I'd think, would be the majority of the fun. Both Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines: Revenge of the Colon and Divinity 2 have done things in this regard. And yeah, it provides new and easy solutions to some quests. Heck, Arcanum let you speak to the dead, which was tremendously helpful in finding out who killed him. With people who have DM experience at the helm, I hope they can fit it in the scope. VtM: Bloodlines did it much better out of the two (VtM ad Divinity 2), or at least I thought so.

I don't think of the idea of the Engineer, as a class, being a bad idea in some ways, though I always felt the name was poorly chosen. The problem I've always had was the implementation. In every game I've ever played they just seemed to be a technology variant of some existing class, in some sequels an Engineer-like class has even just plain replaced another class, not in mechanics, but in visuals, leaving the mechanics mostly the same. If there is to be such a class . . . I'd want it to be very different than any implementation of it I've ever seen.

I just don't want them to DA2 style spawn out of nowhere or with the most contrived justifications possible. What they are, or how many, should be sensible and practical to the content in which the encounter takes place.

. . . but the happy dance isn't unlocked until we hit the three-million mark . . .

You may want to axe the "no one" portion of that claim, since I can actually quote you posts from around the forum saying things like, "things weren't like that back then" or "this didn't exist in medieval times" and so on and so forth as reasons for their opinions or backing for why they think something should/shouldn't be in. And using that the game's setting/naming conventions are "inspired by European culture", as a reason why 'X shouldn't be in" is no less common. It's something that you did in this very thread, I could quote it - I don't see it as any different or any less ridiculous than the, "things weren't like that back then" people that seem to forget this is a fantasy game, not a historical account of medieva times. I don't even mind the people not wanting a Monk in the game. If you've read my post on the last page, the Monk just something I accept, not something I want - there are a hundred, if not more, other things I'd prefer. However all the variations the, "this shouldn't be in because *time period*" lines I see every now and then are all absolute nonsense by my measure. I'm not saying don't pull from an inspired time period, mind you. There are tons of great things to see. We wouldn't have great things like Star Wars without the culture and idea mish mash performed to create it. I am saying, however, that: "The setting, and what's right for, it . . . that's not a matter of time period. It's a matter of what Obsidian are creating. If that includes space men from the planet X then so be it." I don't want space men from the planet X either by the way. That's just an outlandish example. And when I mentioned: "historically accurate replica of medieval Europe" I was also being outlandish, because I've seen posts like that around the forum, and that's what I thought of them . . . that they were outlandish. They had to be joking. Some of them weren't.

So, this is the concept Obsidian presented of a Monk: You don't really need to guess much when the concept sort of speaks for itself. Bare chested. Hands blazing with fiery energies. Cloth wraps on the forearms and shins. We can't see what's on his feet. A belt to hold up cloth pants. Looks like there may be a pouch on the belt. His skin looks lightly tattooed. His hair is either white or gray, a result of age. It seems to be the, "converts inner energies into outer energies" as seen by his fists being alight with energies obviously meant to turn his hands into lethal weapons capable of dealing with armed and armored opponents. This likely will manifest in more than just his hands as weapons, covering a range of offensive and defense types, such as defensive auras or hypernatural senses that allow him to deflect projectiles. Some settings have even included abilities to regenerate or heal on this type of Monk, even the ability to deflect/absorb magical energies with a particular short term ability, usually quite limited in use to balance it. - We could discuss that there were no many tentacled horrors in medieval europe . . . or we could just accept that there are many tentacled horrors in the fantasy setting of this game which is not a word for word, historically accurate replica of medieval europe.

I think that depends on the type of Mage, if the Wizards in your setting are only powerful by way of study and tedious research then that says one thing. Settings that place intelligence as little more than a measure of magical damage and/or magical resource annoy me in their own right though.

While I can appreciate the idea of augmenting the soul somehow as a game mechanic based on "circumstance" or "action" and other factors or through various stimuli . . . I do not see turning it into an alignment/morality system as the right approach.

Interesting way to look at it. I'm able to accept Bards or Paladins, even Monks, but I can't help but wonder about non-standard Class types from Obsidian or unique creations of their own as something I'd prefer.

Isn't that the point, however? There is plenty of other classes to dress up with all sorts of +2 trinkets. It's nice to have a character type that doesn't rely on gear so much. The abilities could be a bit more flexible than average D&D monk level up path, though. That said even D&D styled Monks had options outside the the barehanded.

I take it you are for kung-fu monks then, not everyone has to agree. I am able to accept bare handed Monks punching through plate, and defending against magic and weapons, if, and only if, they're doing so through means that are made readily and visually obvious - such as defensive auras, and conducting offensive energies through their hands/feet/etc. What I'm for? What I for is an Ancient Fantasy game with world that's almost alien on a visual level. I'm for a complete escape from the common fantasy races and the beast+human combo races. What I'm for is a complete escape from the typical fantasy classes, weapons and armor where the plate wearing knight with a sword and shield is so common that everyone in the village used to be one. I'm for a setting where the most common weapon to use in battle would be a spear-like or polearm-like weapon, where leather armor slightly plated with bronze at vital points is standard soldier garb. Where magic pulls from the weird lesser used schools of magic like illusion, divination and transmutation instead of the usual evocation fireball throwing nonsense. What I'm for is a setting that pulls from some of the most ancient cultures our world has ever seen, and less used cultures, instead of the typical roman, medieval and other common eras used. Ancient South American cultures and Ancient Middle Eastern cultures, ancient peoples like the Sumerians. A setting where Chariot warfare is new and the height of war waging technology. A setting where the Gods aren't unseen all powerful beings, or Gods at all, but very powerful or simply very knowledgeable mortal beings who have conducted peoples to their liking or shared their knowledge in a helpful manner, where they aren't rare but there are instead thousands of them using or helping or ignoring the far larger, and far, far more primitive peoples as they please. A setting that meshes primtive people and primitive technologies with magics and 'ancient advanced technologies that are easily mistaken as magical in nature' used by those beings who rule over or enslave or teach or ignore the primitive peoples. - A Monk is most definitely not what I am for, but I can accept it. No, because it was present during late medieval Europe, primitive firearms. But you did not need me to explain that to you surely? "Fantasy game made by a western developer" does not mean, "Historically accurate account of medieval times without variation" regardless of its inspirations, since inspirations can be multiple, which they are since we're also seeing a Monk. No, because it was present during late medieval Europe, primitive firearms. But you did not need me to explain that to you surely? Also, not much to do with monks, is it? Sure it does. You seem to be of the opinion that only gunpowder made it aboard the boat from Asia, but Monks? Thats crazy!

There are names on the map.The majority of them being in English or combinations of English words with a few exceptions. Which obviously means the world should be populated by tanks, skyscrapers, cheeseburger stands, fish and chip pubs and stores selling AK-47s. Yes I know, they also have Celtic inspired names in there and a pull from Celtic Myth but then . . . there are entire swaths of content to pull inspiration from on that level that never would have gotten to the plate knights and guns setting. They could have used ancient Celtic basis. It was an option. But they didn't. They chose to go beyond that. I'm not sure why you think a fantasy world with fantasy cultures would absolutely without fail be exact replica of one area or another, one people or another, based wholly on the naming convention when plenty of RPGs have used english, latin, gaelic and other real world languages for their naming conventions that have had little or nothing to do with the naming convention. In essence, "they used them because they wanted to" or "because they sounded cool" or "that sounds like a fantasy name right!?" I could create an RPG world and name a place, "The lands of the purple hippo people" and not have it have anything to do with European (because it's in English!) or African (because Hippos! [though hippos did appear in Europe during certain periods of time). The reality is that Europe isn't a single culture. It's many, and not just the ones during this or one other particular period of time. The cultures, peoples, standards and ways of living have changed massively over the history. There was a game about primitive cave-man inspired times that used English naming conventionslanguages that had absolutely no historical accuracy. Why? Because they were primarily fictional, fantastical, with spirits and primitive magic. Magic. How do you know? Perhaps they have a large immigrant population. Perhaps just to the right of the edge of the map there is a massive area of people that fit perfectly. Or perhaps right there in the land you see you have a people that practice their own form of martial arts, who use their spirits to conduct magical energies to create defensive auras and conduct offensive energies through their fists. You don't know. I don't know. And would they belong if they were there? If Obsidian put them there? The answer is yes. Yeah, because numbers in the thousands . . . tens of thousands . . . hundreds of thousands, and more, have never crossed oceans in mass for one reason or another. Not to mention there's obviously more land mass to the east and to the north of the shown land mass. Yeah. Masses of people never travel from their own lands, ever, they always stay isolated in their own areas, there has never been a mass exodus of people from a particular area of the world. EVER. And especially not multiple occurences of such mass migrations of people throughout history. "No culture but the Asian cultures have ever held value to the idea of strong people who fought without arms" but, of course, that means nothing. Because it doesn't matter. It's a fantasy world. What a particular culture practices is not limited by historical or cultural accuracy. It's by what Obsidian wants. For the same reason the Mage throws a fireball at the warrior wearing the hardest steal and it still works. I know your entire point falls apart if you recognize this but it's very simple, because even D&D did it, "They enhance themselves with their inner energies" with wholly meshes with the idea of souls that PE has put forth. Souls used for magical purpose. Obsidian outright released a blurb about this saying, "Anything from the mundanely superhuman to the explosively magical." Channeling your inner energies to create defensive auras and to conducting offensive energies through your limbs, fists and feet actually goes right along with that. In fact it goes perfectly with it. Up to Obsidian whether they're naked. Up to Obsidian how they're protected. Up to obsidian whether they're protected by magical symbals carved or tattooed onto their skin. Up to Obsidian whether they produce a magical aura that protects them. Up to obsidian whether the clothing they do wear is western, eastern, middle eastern, african, sourth american or wholly unique in style. Up to Obsidian whether they exist at all. And they do. Most of all, it's not ridiculous. Sort of like Monks in most settings enhance their bodies, regeneration or manipulate energies around them to protect themselves. Or how they sometimes are have protective symbols carved or inked into their skin. Or any number of other ways that it's been done. Sometimes they even wear thick metal bracers to defend themselves. In other settings they wear gauntlets or gloves that are magically enhanced either for defense or offense or even for both. And then there are the claw/knuckle wearing monks. Some have even used Bo staff type weapons for defense and/or offense. In P:E the magic association is especially correct, because, obviously, it is magic. A different use of magic, but still 100% magic. And, for that matter, Monks in various settings aren't always 'nearly naked' as you mentioned earlier, or even Eastern in clothing/armor style, because plenty of Monk-like incarnations have worn clothing or armor. But at the end of the day even a completely naked Monk that refused to use anything would make sense if they were channeling their inner energies to create magical protections and conduct offensive magical energies through their bodies. Everything goes in concept of Souls. If anything, hammering together something as metaphysical as their concept of Souls with standard D&D classes is very crude to begin with, I thought calling "Green Rock" trope on Obsidian after update, but did't, because believe they could get away with it on their quality of writing alone. They started with celtic myth to promote their game. Then they added a gun to it, then a monk. I hope gun won't be blessed by the power of soul or shoot soulblasts They had a gun using Witch character shooting arcane bullets in another one of their games . . .

I don't get some of the arguments against it when a Monk gaining defensive auras and offensive energies from their inner energy goes hand in hand with the P:E concept of Souls. I really don't get it when someone asks, "Why can a Monk can punch a full armored Warrior and have it do anything" styled question. I don't get it because they obviously aren't doing the damage with their fist, they're conducting damaging energies through their bodies. The Monk's fists essentially become magical weapons by way of their inner energy. Some settings have even had the Monk's hands visually take on the type of energy involved, for example Shadowbane had its Irekei Sundancer (essentially Sand Elf Monks) whose fists came alight with flames of great intensity. Other settings have had them dealing in divine energies or pure typless energies or electrical energies, or just plain spirit energy. And, finally, the ones that believe an eastern idea shouldn't be in, and I quote, "a Medieval Fantasy Game" . . . this is a fantasy game, that much is true. It is not, however, a historically accurate account of medieval times with absolutely no variation. In addition, the idea of a person strong or skilled enough to fight without arms is not unique to the eastern world. Once you add in the "Souls" idea of P:E and magic the question isn't, "Why should this be here" but, instead, "Why wouldn't it be here, given the idea of souls?" If a person can learn to use their soul to throw around fireballs . . . why wouldn't someone figure out a way to cover themselves in a defensive aura or conduct offensive energies through their hands? It's just, in essence, another way of using magic. - Also . . . I actually am a fan of the tattooed monk as well, whose tattoos are infused with magical inks, or, where the tattoos themselves are magical symbols of some nature that infuse them with some protection or strength or whatever is applicable to the practical limitations of the setting. Given we're talking about some of the people involved in Planescape: Torment . . . somehow the tattoo thing seems even less far fetched.

Sort of reminds me of a system I once saw years ago that exponentially increased cooldown/casting times based on a debuff, of sorts, that stacked up and increases in duration the more you use "whatever" back to back. It didn't weaken them directly, obviously, but increasing the time/effort involved consistently for abuse of a particular ability sort of reminded me of what you said. Not really something I'd ask for in PE, mind you. Just figured it would be an interesting mention.

I can't say this strongly enough: "No." You know what, if they do, long after the PC version is done and being played, make the console version require people plug a mouse and keyboard into the console to play it so they don't have to change as much, or dumb it down.

If you were paying attention, that was one quote out of several, and the overall mission statement has been that the backers are the boss this time around. Again, I'm not going to say it's a good idea or a bad idea, that's just how they presented it.

It was cute. I'm not sure I'd call that customization as much as combination.

I think attrition can be valuable for pacing, but I think it's more interesting to think about party attrition rather than the attrition of a single character's class-based resources. Are you thinking of a group-wide resource, of sorts, like a 'morale' system for combat then, or do you just mean the group's statistical/resource/tactical potential/limitations as a whole?

Welcome to computer gaming in the 21st century. Call me naive, but I expect the Kickstarter projects to be somewhat different. I think what's important is that we're talking about these things at all. Sure the discussion can get heated, and some people feel strongly, but that's to be expected from people enthusiastic about their hobby.

We like that you want to tell us about the general ideas, I'm curious if someone couldn't compile everything you'd said into a more cohesive whole. It'd be nice to see what you have so far as completely as possible, maybe it would change some minds, or get better feedback, since people would see the 'what we have so far' more completely than the bits and pieces we have, where a commentor can easily miss one, or several, or all, of the bits or pieces. With the obvious, 'Not just a work in progress, but a work that's barely even begun" addendum.

Sounds like a skill based system, say the Quest for Glory series, where a spell's power/effectiveness was calculated from two directions the major factor being your 'skill' in the spell. The first game went from 0-100 and by the fourth game you could bring a skill in any given spell up to 400, and then the fifth game and so on. I'm not sure how I feel about that for a IE styled game to be honest . . . I know from experience it can work, but, it also had its problems. Now obviously this isn't really the exact same as ranking a spell up, and possibly augmenting or outright improving its core function, as well as possibly adding onto it, but it's the first thing that came to mind. Like I said, not sure how I feel about that sort of system for an IE styled game. Though, obviously, if you discount 'use' and just 'it improves' than many D&D spells improved themselves with caster level so . . . yeah. It might not be particularly 'with use' but it comes to the same thing, 'the spell is improved as you advance' albeit not directly as you could, potentially, never have bothered to use said spell, and it would still improve as your caster level did.

I suppose you can somewhat fix the unlimited money thing through a combination of efforts. One of the first is the obvious, limit the amount of money merchants have, and augment their prices on objects of certain types based on how many they have incoming, and how much money they have. That's just the first up front thing, but it's a start. Essentially the end goal is to get a little isolated electronic economy going to ensure the player always needs gold, and never has it just piling up too far beyond the amounts needed so that when they do spend on what they need they have little to nothing left, with the future holding further need for more gold that they don't have yet. Gold being relative of course, they could deal in clam shells for all I care.

I think he's confused . . . gray, foggy choices that challenge morality are not the same thing as meaningless/fake choices that have no effect, or whose effect is just the same as another choice.