teknoman2

and as in all IE games, you should have the option to record some lines of your own and add them in the game for the pc

Alternatively, For he who fights and runs away May live to fight another day; But he who is in battle slain Can never rise and fight again (without a diamond worth 5,000 gold and a 9th level Cleric). provided he did not die from disintegration or the death spell

maybe you can take it out of the class system and put it as part of a faction system. you are a fighter not afiliated with anyone you join a samurai like faction you must adhere to the creed of the faction or face the consequences you are at a situation where the creed works against you and you decide to forget it and do it your way the faction learns of this and you are ordered to kill yourself you give them the finger and walk away bounty hunters and members of the faction are coming for you on a daily basis you either run somewhere out of reach, or destroy the faction to ge them off your back

i think OP has a certain impression that if you dont go straight to the enemy's face and use any (underhanded at times) hit and run tactics you are a coward... he clearly havent played dark souls, where you had to use every trick in the book or get killed instantly there is no honor in battle, there is only kill or die. so as long as you kill and dont die, everything is valid

if the fixed loot is stuff like "the uber sword of mass murder" or "the armor that protects you from a nuclear explosion" or "the bow that fires cruise missiles", then they may be hand placed, you may know where to find them, but i dont think you could reach them before you get to a level that allows you to survive the place they are in

dr house... a cleric... it would be awesome

with a bit of uncharted

did you also see the new torment?

i actually dont like big cities in rpg's... there's a ton of stuff to do, all packed in a small area, making me lose my desire to proceed. the same amount of stuff or more, if scattered around the wilderness does not bother me. in the first BG for instance, i went around the entire sword coast, explored every nook and cranny of all maps, killed as many enemies as i could find and i had fun doing all that, despite the time it took. but as soon as i got in the city and i got bombarded with quests, i lost interest in the game and took quite a bit of effort to keep playing

that graphics card is not exactly made for more than feeding images on the screen, but considering that PE will be mostly 2D, i dont think you will have problems

to me it would be enough to not make the game retardproof. i went a bit retro with games i haven't played back in the day lately, and the first thing i noticed was that i had to use my brain. no convenient solutions to every situation like: "look it's a tank!" big arrow appears "let's take that rpg that just happens to be here when we need it and shoot it". what i also noticed, is that back then they did not bother with using the "politically correct" approach to the game's content and design, thing that very few companies do today

what i'd like to see is a space opera rpg without aliens. just humans doing in space the same things they do on earth: screwing each other for money and power

i dont really care

NO. randomness is bad... randomness is the evil that plagues RPGs!!!

i remember them saying something about an initial event in the story that damages the main character's soul and is the trigger for the rest of it

to make an example. imediate magic (up to 1s casting time) is magic missile, mirror image, shield etc. short (3s casting time) is vitriolic sphere, acid/flame arrow. long (5s casting time) is firestorm, summon elemental etc in fighter/paladin terms, imediate is stance change, aura change etc. short is power attack. long is flurry (several fast attacks over a 5s period)

here's a little suggestion: since the aura of the weapon does not do anything additional to the attack, other than build focus on hit, count the attack as two separate attacks. one with the weapon that compares to the deflection stat to indicate a hit or graze, and one with the energy that compares to psyche stat for the purpose of hit or graze. so you can do a graze with the weapon on a fighter, but get a hit with the purple aura and gain focus

there will obviously be some intro and ending sequence to the game, however i do not care either way for cinematics during the game. however, some sort of character animation during dialogs would be welcome. it doesnt have to be that detailed either, just a pose or something that indicates the mood, like shaking a fist when angry, putting a hand on the chin when thinking, scratching head when confused and such

i like philosophical debates like this, but im too lazy to give a long opinion so immersion is when you forget that you are playing a game and feel as if you are really there. imo, the most important thing to achieve that, is to make the game in a way that the player does not feel like a spectator, and have characters that the player will care about

here's a hypothetical situation. someone asked some mercs to kill me and my party, and i bump into them in the middle of a crowded street. i have the option to fight them with single target spells and attacks to avoid colateral damage, or go full aoe with fireballs, hailstorms etc for a faster and easier win, but i risk involving the civilians. if i choose the second option, why would it be ok for adult bystanders to get blown to bits by my or the enemy's spells (the enemy would use aoe anyway) but children be imune to the attacks? it's not that we who voted the 1st option like to kill children or want to... we just want consistency. if any npc can die during a battle, intentionally or by accident, so should the children. i dont see the reason for them to be magically imune to harm... in this case it would be better to keep them off the game entirely and be done with it

there should be the option to choose between a hardcore ironman mode and a light ironman mode the hardcore is as you described, the light is to keep a backup save at the begining of the last chapter you strated. so if you die you dont need to replay the entire game but restart from the begining of the chapter.

(I'm really growing allergic to this kind of question.) No, it's not acceptable to kill the farmer and all the workers. And you're not supposed to. You can kill them all because you might want to kill one of them. The game doesn't allow you to do this because it wants you to go on a killing spree. Maybe you should think about why you want to kill all these NPCs and their children. Is there a reason for this? Or is it just for the lulz? And yes, it's even less acceptable to kill their child. Because children embody innocence and vulnerability at the same time, and we have a natural, hardwired instinct to protect children, and because society (and most people living in it, minus the sociopaths) finds it morally reprehensible, period. But why am I growing allergic to these questions? Because they're the standard questions that always come up in all these discussions about morality, and they're always completely beside the point. You can agree with me in that paragraph up there or not, but the point remains that society at large sees a difference, a huge difference, between killing children and killing adults, whether you find it logical or not (hint, it's not logical and it doesn't have to be - it's emotional and natural). And the point remains that video games can't allow themselves to include this kind of stuff anymore, which is why even GTA doesn't have children, like I said before. The point also remains that there are possibilities to put children in the game without triggering any political scandals while making the world believable and immersive - as long as you don't go on a psychopathic killing spree. And also you completely missed the point of my list up there. The game allows me to be a thief, so why can't I break into a house in a certain way that would be possible in real life? Why can I pick the lock, but not smash the window? Why can I have a high-intelligence character but cannot go to university to finally discover quantum mechanics? Why can I kill adults but not kill children? It's exactly the same kind of question and the answer is always the same: because there are good reasons. Not because it's logical. But because this is the only feasible way to make a game. And yeah, I'd like to hear some answers to Karkarov's question, other than "because logically it should be possible" or "I want to play a psychopath". Because you do have to try and kill children before you notice that you can't do it. @JFSOCC: That's exactly what I said. They had brutal torture, but they stopped and said "okay but we can't allow the players to kill children". Is that self-censorship? Are all video games since Fallout 2 self-censored and have lost their integrity? I don't think so. Because there was no need for that kind of feature at all. @Sacred_Path: Yeah well. What I said. You instantly see when a town doesn't look right, but you have to try and kill a child to see that you can't. So why would you want to kill a child. but that is the point right there. if you are not supposed to kill him, the devs should deny you the option to attack, and put him in god mode to prevent him from accidentally dying if you fight enemies near him. if they allow you to attack anything you want and be a mass murderer, then it is wrong to keep something out of harms way. so children should be like all other npc in their interaction with the player (either all npc are invulnerable or all can be killed), or they should not be in the game at all

"It would be stupid if I can't roleplay as a thief who breaks into buildings by digging a tunnel." "It would be stupid if I can't roleplay as a scientist doing theoretical research in a university." ... "It would be stupid if I can't roleplay as an abusive husband who beats his wife but frightening her so much that she won't do anything about it." "It would be stupid if I can't roleplay as a person who stalks women at night and sexually assaults them." Some things you just can't expect them to put into a game. (Also, some things you shouldn't.) If you can't play a psychopath who kills everyone, then that's just one little and extraordinarily stupid role among many which the game doesn't allow you to play. If that makes it politically possible to put children in the game, I'm all for it. the game mechanics do not allow you to play as a tunnel digging thief it does not allow you to be a researcher and so on however, if it allows you to attack non hostile npc, then i dont see why some should be an exeption. they can very simply turn all non hostile npc in god mode and remove the possibility to attack or damage, even by accident, a friendly or neutral npc why should it be fine if i can kill the farmer and his wife and all his workers and animals for no reason, but unacceptable to be able to kill his son too? is it wrong to kill only if the victim is not an adult?

children should either be there and be killable like any other npc, or non be there at all. it would be stupid if i decided to play a raving psychopath that kills anything that moves just because he can, then enter a town, kill everyone but be unable to attack children. so either they keep them out, or standard npc rules apply. no fake morality compromises like "it's ok to kill 100 children in real life with a barage of cruise missiles, cause it's the army, bur not ok to accidentaly kill a child with a fireball in a game"

if we take any IE game as an example, it was armor bracers helmet boots belt shield weapon amulet cloak 2 rings instead of more rings you can just add 2 earrings