Jump to content
  • Sign Up


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

58 Excellent

About HansKrSG

  • Rank
    True Dreamer of the Obsidian Order

Profile Information

  • Interests
    P&P RPG's, CRPGs, Computers, Porn


  • Pillars of Eternity Backer Badge
  • Pillars of Eternity Kickstarter Badge
  1. The cap is "hard" at 12th level. Source: I hit the cap with 1/5th of the game left (I am a completionist myself). I also hate hitting a hard cap. All the xp awards seems kinda pointless after you can't get any more xp. I don't know if there are any "fixes" to this yet, but I am sure someone must be working on it.
  2. So, decisions decisions. Should I wait until tomorrow, or start testing after midnight (as it will be in my country), and probably get too little sleep?
  3. Get a job in IT. I know the IT guys get a way higher salary than any other normal jobs in Belarus, although I guess it's not easy to get an IT job there because so many want one. ( I have this info from 3 colleagues I had that is from Belarus)
  4. Persistent, or at least persistent until map reload would be good. Of course, decomposing would be neat, and I like the idea, but it's not important enough to use resources that could go to other "stuff".
  5. I don't think it's crazy difficult, but it seems to give IE players more trouble than any of the other (unmodded) IE games. Not sure if I agree that IWD2 is harder than BG1/2. I couldn't win it playing only 1 or 2 characters, like I can with BG, but I guess that has much to do with the XP-system in 3.0-3.5. Full party IWD2 vs Full party BG2, I feel BG2 is harder. Am I alone in this?
  6. Can't say I agree that TOB was crazy difficult. Yes the enemies was crazy powerful, but so was your characters. I understand that the last battle is pretty hard, if you have the "wrong" party configuration, but the rest was challenging at times (except when doing the "right choices"), not crazy.
  7. I am sure I am beating on a dead horse here (Have been a long time away from the forums), but I just can't get over that the same stat that affects damage, also affects healing... Josh, can't you comment on this to make sure we haven't misqouted you or something?
  8. Shadowrun Returns uses a checkpoint save system if you haven't tried it yet. Because of limitations in time. Aftetr the expansion that is due sometime in the future, you can save anywhere and anytime.
  9. In my first dozen playthroughs of BG2 I hated Anomen and never in the rest of those playthroughs recruited him again after an unfortunate situation where he did something very stupid (don't want to spoil the Anomen story). But I tried again later, and made him not do stupid stuff, and after that, he has been my Cleric of choice if my PC is not a Cleric. Anomen turns out to be bereable after a while after all.
  10. Though I agree with your points, they could use the D20 system if they wanted, its open, although the XP system is not (for some reason; thats why Pathfinder has it's own XP-table). I don't really want them to use D20 even, just wanted to point it out, being nitpicky as I am. EDIT: I guess other people have already mention stuff like this, I just didn't read the whole thread. Sorry about that.
  11. I think that PE should go so far as making the game illegal to sell in Australia and Germany and other places with silly laws. No go fiurther, make it illegal in neo-moralistic scandinavia, that once embraced free speech and freedom of expression, but now wants to make illegal anything "bad". I am not being sarcastic btw, I wan't real evil that will shock and horrify people. Then again, I will play the good path (I am a carebear in games as well as real life), so might be I will never see the evil path anyway.
  12. In BG 2 or Planescape Torment; I never felt that any encounter was out of place or tedious. There was some of it in BG1, where random encounters was pretty boring and seemed very random, but in the other infinity engine games, there was little of that. Even where bandits attacked you in BG 2, you usually got a dialogue, and you understood what the bandits were after, sometimes they were even a part of driving the main story forward. If Project Eternity are going the route of the Infinity Engine games, the random encounters will not feel as random, at least not to me. Now the worst offenders of random encounters are JRPG's, and seeing the OP's mention of specific games like Fire Emblem, I think that where this gripe comes from, but I might be wrong.
  13. That intro always gives me shivers down my spine. Strange that the first comment was not a comment on the similarities between the OP's vision and Planscape: Torment. That said, no, I would not like that intro for Project Eternity.
  14. Great job. It looks just like I feel it should. April 2014 can't come quick enough.
  15. He's not asking that all spells be removed, hes asking that the game be completable without them, which it probably will be anyway. You shouldn't treat every religious person as if they are identical zombies - far from it - and while there are certainly obnoxious people out there, there are plenty of reasonable people out there who are religious and willing to let others get on with their lives. It's just that the idiots who cry witchhunt if they see someone reading Harry Potter on the bus are just a lot more vocal than everyone else. The only way that you can stop this being an issue is to have some dialogue with religion - not the extremists of course, but if a regular people are engaged, see something for what it is then it leaves the extremists without a leg to stand on. I don't believe I did treat this person as an identical zombie; I am arguing that the game shouldn't be designed around one player's moral principles. Get it? I'm disagreeing with the message, rather than the messenger. Sorry about the way I phrased that, I wasn't really addressing that at you so much as using that as a springboard to try and pre-empt any full on religion-bashing - I've seen quite a lot of Gamers vs Religions with each being openly hostile to the other in a way that just makes matters worse. As for the around one players principles, it depends on context, and what you mean by one player. To take the game "Smite" that there was a bit of an issue around last year, where there was an issue of it including Hindu Gods and Goddesses in an arena battle game alongside Greek, Viking and Egyptian deities. I'm not religious in the slightest but you could see that was going to offend people from a mile off and to me if nothing else ts good manners not to include a being or beings that approximatly ONE BILLION people consider to be real in a beat-em-up. What should have happened was the company should have gone "Oh, we're dreadfully sorry, we didn't really think it through properly, we shall remove them immediatly", but what happened in stead was effectively numerous mssage boards of idiot gamers saying effectively "suck on that organised religion", with the actual company replying basically that they were going to carry on adding more Gods. Which isn't to say that religion shouldn't be allowed in games, far from it, games are as a valid a medium to say what they like as books or film or whatever, but there is a difference between considered inclusion of something, even in such a way as if you were to make a game that specifically critiqued a certain religion, to just going "hey that guys deity looks cool, lets stick them in this fighting game so they can get beaten up!". We live in a very diverse world and the sooner people work out that other people are different to themselves and the sooner people stop doing things which will offend others because they didn't think about it and it seems fun the happier everyone will be. Equally though there are some cases where Religious people also need to look at things in perspective: I read something somewhere abotu a guy who returned Marvel: Ultimate Alliance to a shop because you had to find 5 candles to form a Pentagram to get through Mepihsto (the Devil Analogues) Realm. Where its something like that and they aren't familiar enough with their own religion to know that the pentagram was in the past a Christian symbol, and the context of the game where you had just killed hundreds of demons to get these candles, you can fairly safely assume that Captain America isn't a secret demon worshipper. In the case of the thread, yes it may one man's oppinion here, but as we already know it's possible to solo the game this isn't even an issue. In general, if a game doesn't have a point to make and it's a minor thing to change (or as in this case, not a thing at all), why not fix things to make more people feel comfortable playing your game, and help lessen the bad blood between religion and games? I began reading your post, thinking I would agree with your message, as many here is unnecceseraly hostile to the question of the OP, which is pretty innocent. But reading on, I understand pretty quickly that we don't agree after all. When it comes to works of art, wether as books, paintings, sculptures, movies, music or even computer games, I will not condone any compromise to the artistic vision. Religious or philosophical ideas should not be able to bend or change the art, except if that was the artists wish of course. Neither would I condone someone feeling compelled to change their work based on irreligious wants, nor political ones, so this goes all ways for me.
  • Create New...