Shadenuat

I'm not sure, SoZ pretty much let you win any conversation if it's winnable, and exploit each and every option. It would make picking protagonist's skills a bit meaningless. I'd probably prefer NPC's standing for themselves in dialogue when it suits their character; for example, if one of them is a cleric, you get a free pass to services his church provides, or something like that.

Also, don't make a game an RPG. Because with third-person Action/RPG you can ease player's immershun in game and show-off that amazing 3D engine. Also, more gold!

I think characters should act... in their character. The conflict behind their high usability but zero ego-stroking can actually play out. Edwin and Korgan were always mocking [CHARNAME], yet they are very popular, because they were funny, and also excelled at their respective roles - best fighter and best mage you could have. Ultimately, what I think Chris was saying, is you should't go completely emo on companions. As he pointed out right, player gonna spend a lot of time with these guys, and if they are as annoying as one mage made by we-know-which-company-I-am-talking-about, they would not work. I'm also a big fan of Myron. He was a great subversion. I can't believe people won't take him because he's "useless". He just made everything so much funnier when you carry this dickwad around. Fall-From-Grace also was great subversion to idea that "people who don't fight, don't adventure". Yeah, yeah, Call Lightning. But inability to use weapon because of her belief was great.

I can't disagree with you completely here, but I don't have to, because that does't by any means prove people mocking boobplate wrong. Character we are presented with does not look like somebody rich and powerful with need to impress or be separated from "the rabble" (she does't wear a crown, doest she?). Ironically, if we'd get a male in ornamented armor which would rather suit a king than an adventurer, there won't be as much butthurt as for boobplate, even if it's even more distant from reality. But that's what you get when you constantly try and promote stupid. Boobplate is stupid, metal **** is kinda stupid, and gold armor set with rubies on somebody who does't even have a house is, too, stupid. But some stupid is just so annoyingly and persistantly stupid, it draws attention instantly. Like the f-n boobplate.

You did't read about the codpiece, did't you? Before you get your head out of sand and understand the difference between armor you find in museum, armor for high ranking officers and real ******* armor, for the love of god, ban yourself in google.

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/307/5/5/age_meme___edwin_odesseiron_by_taricalmcacil-d323z45.jpg Born in robe. Lived in robe. And I shall die in robe, you monkeys!

I already said about codpiece, as for there is a reason why that military tradition concede to much better curved steel armor, but if you have no idea what's the difference between bronze age and an age with steel armor and wheellock guns, I can't help you.

I also suck at seeing things, I just noticed a trigger lol. Well instead of working the cord and looking like an idiot trying to make it burn with your mouth, you use special key for lock to make spring move the wheel which has knurl on it. When you pull the trigger, wheel starts to turn fast and knurl scratches little piece of pyrite. That creates spark, and spark ignites powder.

You can see plate gauntlet and armor on fingers only covering extern part of the hand, the inside is probably thin leather which is preferable for holding weapon more tightly. She probably would use a paper capsule with gunpowder of some sort, and everything else I think can be done with gloves on. If weapon have large moving parts and is fit for using in gloves, would there be a problem? What triggers? There's that lever which you put burning cord in, move a lever, cord hits powder, and gun shoots. Were there even triggers before serpentine locks? But I kinda suck at history of those kind of weapons.

We are not sure about that yet. For what we know, our adventuring party gathered not because they wanted TO ADVENTURE, but because of some special event. Also, I don't buy into explaining ridiculous stuff with other ridiculous tropy stuff. Maybe in D&D they have Adventure Parties, Adventure Academies, Adventure Guilds and they can act stupid because they are ADVENTURING and such, but usually you do not gather onto a life-changing trip with possible death at the end just because OF ADVENTURE.

Yeah the mail just sucks. It does't look like one and does't behave line one either. Making these sorts of assumptions about armor using museum armor is a common mistake. Suddenly, one or two codpieces made by fancy lords can be thought as a common thing. You have to understand something when you are seeing armor like that - most of the armor we can check at museums was made for kings and rulers and brought to them as gifts. These suits were gathering dust in their treasures for hundreds of years without any chance of actually being used in combat. Not that they were't meant for it completely, a lot of ornamented and beautifully made armor, even from later ages, probably can serve perfectly fine as real armor would and anyone from those times would easely trust it their life. But you have to put things in a bigger perspective. Generally in combat, everything which is made to show off or sticks from armor too far, like horns or alike, would be the first thing getting cut away. Even today people who like to kick each other with metal sticks often go for the guy in the most fashionable equipment if they are given an option.

I still don't understand where did the other parth of cuirass go, and how the plate skirt, if it's a skirt, actually holds without it. Also, I just noticed how the shield actually connects to her body. I am not sure if it's the right way of carrying a shield on your back, at least not how I've seen people carrying their shields if they use one. I think you would want to either have a single strap which goes diagonally around your torso, or maybe two like on a backpack. That allows you to easy get it off and defend yourself. With that kind a system Cadegund has, I think she'd need someone's help to actually remove shield from her back, cause it won't be easy to unlock all the metal clasps etc. Yeah, nitpicking. This picture is better than the old one.

Rather what I expect later. It's all cool and right, and I completely agree and everything, it just that it contradicts with some games and stuff already have been done.

Uhuh.

Just use cheat codes or trainers. If people don't want any challenge and do not respect developer's work on gameplay enough to at least try and beat the game fair, then they have nothing to loose by using them.

That too. Our heroine here has a pretty damn expensive set of armor, including carefuly made (and well-drawn, by the way, unlike some other parts) plate gloves, bracers and everything. There is no reason to break the plate set and leave her belly open like that, exept for purely fashion purposes.

To keep their incesties inside their bodies, probably. Which means designing a plate to deflect blows, not to lead them right in the chest. But I am a fencing weeaboo, so forgive my ramble.

By the way, it's not only boobplate, but what's beneath it seems wrong too. Is that supposed to be a mail? Because mail... does't really look like that, it seems she rather has sort of batman-rubber like undersuit than a mail. *headdesk*

Ohiboobplate. Long time no see. And here I hoped at least some artists can avoid fantasy-art brainwashing, but alas, they continue to fail their Will-check when it comes to armor plausibility.

I would like to see special rules when fighting in a swamp, like in some wargames.

Terrible idea, born of pandering to MMO fashionists. Burn it with fire.

Catgirls. ...it's an Obsidian game, one of the last bastions of RPG's. There can't be more, only all and everything in a small hope of incline. In a Game of Incline vs Decline, you bet everything and win, or you die.

First of all, we can't usually jump nor climb in isometric games. Second, wizards are not supposed to do such mundane acts like climbing or jumping. I have my Spider Climb, Levitate and Jump spells for that anyway. Third, ritualistic garment comes from the idea that some mystic forces require specific clothes, incense, candles, ingredients and place to do magy stuff. And forth, robes *are* comfy and warm. So get your ******* hands off my robe and hat! And my staff! And my bunny familiar! I there won't be robes and hats in game, I AM CANCELLING MY PLEDGE! Okay?! Thanks! ...just kidding. But I do like robes and hats. Sorry.

Killed me. ...but, to answer your question - in one of the updates I believe it have been said, that you will be able to get through the game even without some, or any, party members. So your easy would't probably be less easy than regular Infinity Easy.

Yeah design of encounters is probably the most important stuff when it comes to combat. Noah just scratched the surface of it though in his video about dragons, there's also some in the video "Don't get on a boat!". There are't many games where you fight monsters in their own familiar environment which they use to give you more trouble. Usually it's "your rules vs. monsters rules" not "your rules vs. monsters rules vs. environment rules".