Jarmo

I'm cool with that, but I hate how the games always prod you into taking that choice. Because it's always something like: - goddamn, I deserve more -> 1500 gp + 250 XP - thanks for the reward -> 1000gp +500 XP - Oh, no reward is necessary -> "oh, then at least take this magic sword wotth 2000 gp" + 1000 XP

I'd guess they'd like to avoid pulling a Torment. A game getting great reviews and a cult following within 10 years, but is too alien for most players and a total flop as far as sales go. Most players includes me, I liked torment, but I liked BG and IWD setting more. Familiar/boring/whatever. Hey, I'd like a real historic setting even better...

I do know I'm change resistant, but... I don't like the sound of that, at all. My ability to do damage with a big rock or a spell are governed by the same attribute?? I can see it's streamlined and certainly goes a long way towards removing dump stats, but right now it seems to be doing that with a cost of being an entirely stupid system. There's certainly stuff I dont know / cant see yet, so it may all make sense when explained.

This attribute thing does sound... odd. Same attribute actually governs how hard I hit with an axe, how well I heal people and how how effectively I cast magic missiles?

I've played BG2 twice, and both times had to use a walkthrough to get past the skinned people quest. Because I found the right house all right, but didn't find the stairs down when in the house. The first time I didn't know there'd be stairs and just didn't see them despite walking past many times. The second time I vaguely remembered I was looking for a way down, but still mistook the stairs for a pile of crates or something. PE will have a bit sharper graphics, but sometimes a little hand holding is still a good thing. Because I wouldn't think that's the intended kind of challenge. (Buahahaa, bet the adventurers will mistake the stairs for a piano).

The original suggestion in this thread was to change hitting so ranged characters would have less glancing hits and more misses, not the other way around. Something I could agree with. I'd further like, if when shooting into melee, a miss would have a chance to hit someone else in the melee, so shooting into brawl wouldn't be so tempting. Archers would still fire at enemy archers or spellcasters, if any, or join the hand to hand combat. At very high skill or confidence level, they could continue firing not worrying they'd hit friends. Yes, it's a game and it's inherently going to be unrealistic. But if a fun gameplay can be reached by either trying to figure out what's happening in real combat and modeling that, or by pulling arbitrary rulesets out of ones butt and rolling with those, I'd strongly favour going with realism.

But could use a bit more realism then? Because I don't think medieval melee saw a lot of archers going all legolas. Maybe higher chances to miss or hit friendlies when shooting into a melee? Because you'd have a high chance to hit your pal in the back.

I'd prefer the worlds massiveness cut by a third, several characters and quests removed if the remaining part would then be in high polish when released. Much like the mentioned MotB. Few characters, not all that many locations, shorter than OC by half. Didn't suffer for it.

I think there was a mention the armor would be one piece in IE style. Then gloves, boots and hats. Not sure though. I'd guess there'd be half armor sets available. Partly armored would really require hit locations to work out, which would be awesome but I doubt we'll see it here.

To go completely off track, this is actually a pretty darn good read, (or listen as I did). http://www.amazon.com/The-Poison-King-Mithradates-Deadliest/dp/0691150265 http://www.audible.com/pd/ref=sr_1_1?asin=B004LBKLV2&qid=1373889018&sr=1-1 A bit like Hannibal of Carthage you've never heard of, or heard of in passing.

They have sort of addressed this. Basically, with DS3 they didn't need to take a buggy pile of code and build on top of that, instead built the game from scratch themselves and the result wasn't buggy at all. Or so people say. Haven't played it myself, also gave up Alpha after the tutorial.

The game should be intuitive enough to play without a manual. If I need a specific piece of information, it's easier to find with a search from a digital manual. That said, if there's some stuff that'd work better in a manual, then by all means make one. But don't just start up making a manual and then try to think what to put there. One suggestion. Back in the eighties, the absolute best game manuals were made by Microprose. There were the obvious how to play parts and keyboard layouts, but the extra info was the neat bit. - Stealth fighter had pictures and stats and info of bazillion fighter planes of the era. - Red Storm Rising the same of submarines. So maybe something that'd explain to newcomers what's a brigandine, or estoc, or wheellock, or lamellar, or whatever stuff the game tosses your way.

1. Not routine and not common, but with a whole nation tasked at practicing a whole lot, there's bound to be some that at least come around the ballpark. But even that is not all that important. 160lb draw would still do quite a bit more than 100lb bow does. Brings a thought, that if using D&D numbers, the maximum draw could simply be STR score x10, so a STR 16 fighter could use a 160lb bow.. The point being, if a 100lb bow makes a hole in some plate, a 200lb bow would likely be devastating. 2. With knights and such using mail armor and footmen using padded armor, would they really not have noticed a padded armor actually gives a better protection? The test results seems to indicate this is the case, but I can't believe it. 3. Yeah, the normal longbow or warbow is something I doubt there'll ever be true agreement on. But I said normal bow. As is something you don't need to take forever and ever to be a master of, and don't need to carve out of the trunk of a special tree. I mean a hunting bow you make from a tree branch, or just any of the better made bows that dont have such enormous pulls. Say.. 10 to 25 lb draw. Quite enough for hunting and making nasty holes in unarmored people. Stuff that was used by american indians or for example, without metal tools you can't easily fell a tree and make your bow from the good stuff inside.

A few more. I do really think minor characters are important and can be somewhat memorable, but at least set the mood. Most of them do a bad job at it though, being just cutouts or pastiches of something easily recognizable. Fallout 2, Renesco the Rocketman Spells out to the player what kind of town New Reno is "Yeah, I sell drugs in a store". Mass Effect, the ...ummm..security head type in the offices building. Knows he's faced with impossible task, keeping the order in citadel, but still wants to do things by the book, or there'll be chaos. Acts as a kind of opposing argument to Garrus who just wants to get things done. Fallout NV, the albino sniper gal in that base with the big statues. NCR isn't all whiny incompetence, there's a bunch of good fighters out there but they can only achieve that much. Knowing even competent warriors are frustrated, unable to make a difference, adds to the feel of impending doom.

You know what's weird? People in fantasy worlds can develop a single potion solution to counter-act ANY poison in the entire world, no matter what it is. But, they can't seem to develop a vaccine to even a single one. Pure mithridatium.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithridate

Most likely the game is not ever happening as such. But there's a high chance Osidian will recycle any usable ideas into some other future game.

With boob plates as well, combined with impressive codpieces. Wanna come and say something about my outfit? Would you like to meet mr. halberd?

Besides. I'll just plain want to cheat. If not on the first play, then later, if I play it more than once.

A very interesting read, thank you. A second testing I've seen where Armor jack is surprisingly effective. I've sort of wrapped my head around the fact it could be very effective against piercing arrows, since fiber resistance is much the thing allowing kevlar to stop bullets. But being that good against cutting arrows is a surprise indeed. As is the relative weakness of mail. One thing coming to mind, is a 200 lb pull bow would probably be as high as could be pulled by anyone, but would likely go through a thin plate and just about any armor. Well within reason for an RPG anyways. A second thing is, I just can't believe that mail penetration. There has to be something. Third thing, any of the tested armors would give a solid protection from a "normal" bow.

Same here (beside buster), which is something I found somewhat puzzling. When I started thinking, I was sure there'd easily be a good pile of them given how many CRPG's I've played, but... no. Not easy.

Not companions, not major enemies, maybe faction leaders. Traders, quest givers, people you meet and interact with. They can be humorous, they largely set the mood of the whole rpg. Remember any who stood out as particularly awesome? For what reason? What kind of NPC's would you like to see in PE? A few examples. Icewind Dale (and 2). Nym the Drow merchant. Now I don't remember what kind of dialogue he had, but I do remember that I do remember him. Maybe it was just that he had a good selection of items and a some kind of a good reason to have that selection. Not a good guy, not super evil either. Was there even a chance to fight him in iwd 2? Fallout 2, First Citizen Lynette. OMG what an arrogant uptight b*****. Set the tone for the whole vault city experience just perfectly. It's not an evil place and she's not evil, but... hell. And she's kind of a major NPC, so breaking my own rules straight away.. Fallout NV, Little Buster Now he's a minor NPC. Doesn't give missions, doesn't really help you at all, doesn't say much, but every single line he has is quotable comedy gold.

To go on a tangent. I see 3 animated responses in this thread and I have no idea what the posters are trying to communicate. Best guesses: - get outta here, a laughable idea for a game - kill it dead - I'd rather play assasins creed

Other. If you take some capital city, with surrounding towns and villages and every bit of land either reserved for agriculture or as some park like hunting grounds for local nobles. Then the wilderness shouldn't be there at all really. Except for the occasional river-troll or another plague or dead raising from the graves and such. Most likely there's a town wall, but that's in case of an invasion or a peasant revolt. Then again, you might have a mining town much further away in the wilds. Might be tribes of angry savages nearby. Then the wilds can start right after the palisade. Almost nobody besides a few rangers venture outside. You have your wells and small gardens inside the walls of the settlement, but mostly the food and stuff comes in the same way the ore goes out. By ships or riverboats. Even in the second example though, you wouldn't be likely to be jumped by eleven dinosaurs right after you step outside the perimeter. Might still be noticed by elven scouts or something.

And that sounds just fine and dandy to me. Voted for "yes" and "other". I liked D&D 3.x style feats, but disliked the idea of prestige classes. Especially as you pretty much choose the prestige class in order to be able to choose the feat you really wanted. Much rather choose from a pile of feats and build your own prestige class. (Actually I'd rather a classless system where you pick feats to build your own class).

In PE or in most any game in general, you're almost guaranteed to be able to strike through plate with a sword. It's just going to be damage reduction of some amount. So you'll also be able to shoot (some damage) through plate. Almost certainly you can do some damage with a shortbow, some more with crossbow. Can't see it'd be 5 points with shortbow and 50 with a heavy arbalest, games just don't work that way.