HansKrSG

Though I loved Irenicus, bad guys like on Fallout:NV would make it possible to side with the bad guys, and choice is usually a good thing in a good rpg.

I would not want any of us, whatever writing skills we imagine we have, to write any lore or the like in this game. I am sure some simple scripts and programming snippets could be done by a few of the backers, but I think the time and money it will cost the project to find suitable people for such a task, and then checking at each turn that whatever they delivered, actually worked, I don't think it will benefit Obsidian at all.

If you are right, that would be a very interrestin tactical element, balancing not going unconscious and using special actions, but I don't think you are right. According to the description given by Obsidian, Endurance is health, and losing Health is more like (comapring it to D&D) being at -x health.

Though I think you sound like Sheldon (Big Bang Theory), and take things completely out of proportion, I agree that the Stamina/Health system they are proposing sounds iffy.

Although I feel you have too few options in this poll, thankfully for me, I agree with one of the choices. A journal that feels like a journal, but which is grouped logically to make it easier to get the info you are looking for, sounds nice.

Though its true that 2-handed swords were not used much before the reneissance, their use was wider than breaking up spearman formations. Remember also that PE is in the Reneissance, although maybe not culturally, technologically we have gunpowder and the Full Plate, which was not in use before, you guessed it, the Reneissance. Some snips from a site about 2-handed swords: "The two-handed sword was a specialized and effective infantry weapon, and was recognized as such in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Although large, measuring 60-70 in/150-175 cm overall, it was not as hefty as it looked, weighing something of the order of 5-8 lbs/2.3-3.6 kg. In the hands of the Swiss and German infantrymen it was lethal, and its use was considered as special skill, often meriting extra pay." “In the infantry unit, the German and Swiss Landsknechts positioned the Doppelsöldner (Soldiers who received double pay for wielding the two-handers) in the front ranks for a long time to strike down the opposing pikes and to hack out breaches into which one's own soldiers could penetrate. However it would become unusable, as soon as the opposing forces collided with one another, and there would be increased pressure from the back ranks onto the front ranks, which created a thick melee.” Thus, “sometime around the middle of the 16th century it (the two-hander) disappeared from war and mutated into a form of guard and ceremonial weapon with a symbolic character.” "European sword making technologies throughout the Middle Ages and Renaissance were quite capable of producing high-quality, lightweight, and flexible steel blades for cutting swords that could hold keen edges. These weapons were not intended to defeat heavy plate armor with powerful cuts but did evolve from those longswords that were developed for use against armors by thrusting rather than cutting. Handling real specimens of some of these enormous but beautiful weapons is enlightening, for their size betrays their exceptional balance. It very quickly becomes clear they were intended for large fighting men to deliver not only powerful slashing blows but great stabbing attacks as well as pole-weapon-like techniques. Large as they were, they were not ridiculously heavy." ref: http://www.thearma.o...ssays/2HGS.html

Not quite sure what option would be the right one. but I think there should be some main groups with subsets that behave differently in a realtively logical way. IE: Bladed weapons/swords: 2-handed swords, 1 handed swords, shortswords. Pole weapons: short spear, long spear, Halberd, etc. etc. Of course, some weapons should probably behave much the same, but with logical differences, like a better reach with a long spear, than a short spear, for example. I see no nead for having too similar weapons, like: 2-handed sword, Claymore, Flamberg in the same game. Thats just superfluous.

I can't see how using a controller on this type of game would be at all enjoyable. If you want to get that to work, you would probably have to do a lot of work to get it to be playable, and maybe core controlling would have to be changed. I would not support this.

I don't want to put a vote on this, my option would be, "that sucks, but I would probably use some money to get the game, just not as much as otherwise". That said, I do like turnbased, but not in the type of game Obsidian is making with PE.

When attacking someone with armor, there should be a chance, depending on how covered your opponent is in armor, that you bypass the armor entirely. If the armor is not bypassed, armor should subtract from the total damage. Some types of weapons should also be more effective at penetrating some types of armor.

Give me ammo that I have to replenish now and again. Having 60 or 120 arrows at the ready in your quiver (as in BG and BG2 respectively) shouldn't make it too much of a hassle to replenish the stock. You will probably need to go to a shop every now and again anyway, and then you can buy new ammo at the same time.

Born Montenegrin, raised brunost-and-bakels-Norwegian. I was born in Norway, but visited Yugoslavia (When it still was one country), when I was 7. Does that count?

I don't agree. There is no reason Obsidian can't do like in BG, namely put actual lootable victims on the ground, to do this, instead of having some secret "understanding" of that the gold on the wolf is from past victims. Even in a pen and paper rpg, I would never let the characters find gold on an animal (except if the animal had eaten someone whole, money and all), and would describe that they found whatever valuables on the remains of the victims (for example). Doing as you suggest is lazyness, both in a crpg and in a pen and paper rpg.

Give me freedom in naming my character, and I am happy.

The mystery of the background of the main character in Torment could be a nice middle ground. You get hints about your past, but not enough to set anything in stone.

Ok, even if noone answered, I have donated the extra $8 through Paypal, so ignore my last post.

Yo. After I first added the neccesary cash to the kickstarter, I upped my pledge to exactly the cost of a higher tier pledge+postage. So technically I can't be in your club anymore. That being said, my pledge is pretty high, so not sure if you should strip me from my title or not. I could give Obsidian $8 through paypal if its required and its still possible though.

Most monsters in the D&D books are based on real life myths, and is not the IP of Wizards of the coast. The only ones I can name from memory are: Drow, Illithid (Mind Flayers), Githzerai and Githyanki. Kobolds are "a sprite stemming from Germanic mythology" (shamelessly copied from wikipedia), so anyone can call their monsters kobolds, no copyright on these tankfully. That said, I do not hope they copy paste the monster manuals, but use what they feel is appropriate for their setting, based on their own imagination, or from myths and folklore.

This is probably because of the Drizzt Do'Urden books. He was described as a Ranger and was the definite master of the two-weapon style in the Forgotten Realms (the base world in AD&D, if any was). I might be wrong and this connection might have been made before the Drizzt books, but if so, I am unaware of it, please correct me if I am wrong. The ranger from LOTR, Aragorn, was described not as much as a bowvielding hunter with an affinity for animals, than a master warrior, though stealthy nonetheless. The meaning of Ranger in real life is just as wide, and include wildlife protectors, police enforcment, military branches and simple wanderers. Not quite sure where I am going with this, but I guess a point could be that ranger could mean most anything in this game, depending on the developers vision, though I guess that they should be good at moving around at least

If someone is using a shortsword to attack me, I want to be able to loot that shortsword after I have killed him for his transgression. I will probably leave most such loot after a while playing the game, but it just feels more right when I can pick up whats obviously there, instead of getting some random trinkets/potions/coins (or nothing). As far as I can remember, some comment from one of the developers pretty much state that you can pick up whatever weapons and armor your enemy is wearing. Maybe someone with the time and inclination could find that quote for me?

Yes, indeed, Reflir--'tis I come to haunt a new forum now that BioWare has undeniably degenerated into EAWare. I don't know of anyone from the OffTopic II, III, or IV on these forums, but Sylvius the Mad, Tigranes, Volourn, and a couple of others I'm having trouble remembering at the moment are active here. It's good to see you still enjoying cRPGs. I once was really active on the NWN2 forums, but that was under another name. I remember a few of the names you mentioned myself.

Though I agree with what you are saying, being argumentative (or just a bastard ), I have to point out that starting gear for a normal warrior would more probably be a mace than a longsword, which cost a whole lot more expensive material and skill to make.

Just have to nitpick, a Paladin is not a monk, though the typical RPG Paladin don't gather wealth, Paladins in real history, if we base the modern use from the origin of Rolands companions, are more like noble warriors like the knights of the round table, good hearted yes, but not in any way poor by choice, neither is there a connection to the use of the title Paladin and refraining from having sex, such as monks in any religion that comes to my mind, does. To the actual topic: Having monks being the D&D-type martial artist, kung-fu type monk, is getting a little old. I am hoping for a more european type of monk as base, making the playstyle completely different.

I totally agree with the OP. Makes it feel cheaper to use a lot of time with a specific gang of people, when those you never see get the same rewards for the hard work, as the ones actually doing the hard work.

And if you do find gold on a boar, there better be a good story as to how a boar has gold on him