rjshae

In the IE games it was possible to expand the dialogue window so that you can read lengthy messages without needing to scroll repeatedly. It's not clear that you can do that here. Otherwise though it appears fine.

Yeah, if you want to allow characters to do all the same things, you may as well use a point-based system. A class-based system is centered around the concept of making distinctly different characters. Sure, some overlap is okay--just not to a significant degree.

It successfully communicated the intent, so it worked. There's no reason to be disappointed with normal non-verbal communication methods. You'd prefer purple with pink polka dotted light effects on the ground? Just trying to make sure I understand.

I'm picturing ciphers as being very conscious of what others think of them, so they go for stylish attire, good grooming, and polished speech patterns. They may be disdainful of violence and thuggish behavior, so they tend to do battle from a distance and favor armor that provides decent protection against missile file but is light enough to stay out of the reach of heavy fighters. In terms of effects, I think you want them to be distinctive from elemental effects such as fire, electricity, acid, or frost, so perhaps violet-tinted hues with subtle sounds and less violent and/or aural-type visual patterns.

Unless I'm mistaken, we're short a few Nana's...

It can probably all be boiled down to one word: choice. The more freedom you have to choose your character and decide how he makes his way through the game world, the closer it is to being a role-playing game. Character progression, interaction, story, reactivity, and game play mechanics are all just the means to implement player choices.

Explosive flatulence; particularly nasty stuff. That must have been quite the bean sandwich for lunch.

Thanks for the clarification. That seems like a reasonable approach. Rather than unleashing the spell four times, would the mages be able to work together to cast a more powerful version of the spell? I.e. as a group ritual casting.

It's funny though, the more I look at the original layout, the more I appreciate the design. I guess it's often a matter of what you're used to.

I like it; the interface is functional and stylish. The favorites option is a particularly nice touch.

A patient player can do this in any IE game as well (barring areas you can't return to). I don't think our economy should be balanced around the expectation that players are impatient. It might be interesting if the weight of your stash effected your overland movement rate, which in turn modified the likelihood of an encounter with bandits, robbers, or hungry beasts. Large loads might also attract the interest of tax collectors, who would want a cut of the loot, or the toll gates of lords who are looking to equip their own militia. Hold up. Unlimited inventory sprang forth to stomp out the scourge of degeneratively walking back and forth to collect loot. Now we have to add more penalties to the mechanic because people will be carrying everything not nailed down? The difference is that in the first instance you were traveling back and forth through already cleared terrain. Ergo, the activity was pointless. Traveling overland is not the same thing, and the increased risk factor would be a counterbalance to an unlimited carrying capacity. But this risk could be tempered by spending part of your money on improved portage: a bigger wagon, a team of horses, a flying vehicle, a teleporter pad, use of a merchant service, &c. That provides another economic element.

Since the layout would be different, this is a false statement.

For this type of layout I'd suggest trying the "Rule of Odds" and placing something near the top center: perhaps a version of the central controls from the original layout. Hopefully it would then look less unbalanced.

For all of those things audiovisual elements could be included. Your partymembers could be limping or they could sneeze and cough if they are sick...So you know that something is not right. If you want to know what time of day it is, open the inventory and take a look a the watch. Of course, dialoges would still be in place, maybe similar to how Ultima 8 did them (which by the way did not have a UI/HUD, too): http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090825111253/u5lazarus/images/2/2f/Bane.jpg Another idea would be to have health and mana/stamina displayed as bars if you mouseover the partymember. If you do not hover with the mouse over the partymember, the bars are not displayed. They could also be permanently displayed during combat. Audio elements can be less clear and even annoying when repeated enough times. I prefer visual queues. But to each their own.

A patient player can do this in any IE game as well (barring areas you can't return to). I don't think our economy should be balanced around the expectation that players are impatient. It might be interesting if the weight of your stash effected your overland movement rate, which in turn modified the likelihood of an encounter with bandits, robbers, or hungry beasts. Large loads might also attract the interest of tax collectors, who would want a cut of the loot, or the toll gates of lords who are looking to equip their own militia.

Even in exploration mode, I think you still want to at least see the status of the party members. Any lingering effects should be clearly visible. You would also need to know the time of day and possibly the sky conditions if weather changes are important. Finally, the dialogue window may also be needed if the game is particularly chatty about what you see. Hence I don't think you can completely do away with the interface elements.

I don't think you want to have too much overlap between the unique capabilities of the classes. If Fighters get spells at all, they should probably be associated with the martial arts. For example, grow a pair of magical arms and fight four-handed; blur your weapon so it is harder to parry; create a temporary cojoined twin so you can fight back-to-back with yourself...

Yes it's an okay idea, but you must admit this is a corner case. If they implement it, a function key should suffice. It shouldn't take any screen real estate away from the more common actions.

I looks to be pretty difficult to come up with a good design that maintains balance, a consistent motif, doesn't take up too much screen real estate, and is highly functional. In that regard I have to say that I'd have a real issue with some of the alternative designs posted here. It isn't necessary to have larger portraits because you just need to see enough to be able to identify them and click the icons with a mouse. Also, I don't believe the spell icons should dominate the interface. Finally, many of these designs look inconsistent and, well, kind of ugly. Anyway, just hoping for the best in the end.

Okay, replace all instances of "logic" in my argument with "mysterious patterns/mysterious logic/supernatural metaphysics/etc", it's still not the same thing as how clerics/priests get their power. Sorry, I can't help you.

I don't really know what you're going on about. You accused a deityless cleric of being the same thing as a wizard, and then I listed the differences and lore between the two. Wizards use logic to cast magic, clerics don't, it's as simple as that. Once again, it makes a huge difference. Wizards perhaps use some type of mysterious pattern to cast spells. Is that logical? Perhaps it uses a supernatural metaphysics that has a mysterious logic to it, but we don't know that. Ergo, your axiom is unprovable and your argument is baseless. You discuss this by making assumptions about my thought patterns and using absurd extremes when even your own statements are not grounded in reality. A huge difference? No, this is just silly.

Perhaps, but isn't that a legitimate reason as well? Definitely. To my eyes the dark control bar along the bottom creates a weight that draws the eyes downward like a misproportioned picture frame. Perhaps a gap or two in the bar would give the illusion of a taller display with a more natural aspect ratio? Or they could split the character/icons into a relocatable vertical box along the left and center the control/dialogue a little more.

I have this sneaking suspicion that the real reason people prefer the L-shaped interface is because it preserves the (golden) aspect ratio of the viewing area.

Heh, a hundred postings, a hundred different opinions.

Also ignoring that wizards can't channel positive energy for no reason, it's about a big a leap as to any other caster class. In Project Eternity, literally the only thing seperating a wizard and priest in function is how they use their souls, this is a similar case for D&D as well. Druids derive their power from nature, Clerics derive their power from deities (or their philosophy and beliefs, unless you know, you break the rules to not allow clerics to do that), Sorcerers just have innate magical power, Bards are similar to sorcerers (but they perform instead for some reason), Wizards derive their power from logic. So according to you, wizards, sorcerers, bards, druids, and whatever else I missed that doesn't have a deity are basically the same things. So yes, it is a big a leap as I think. One's source of power in D&D dictates one's magical abilities, so logic =/= belief. It makes a huge difference. Ah, another reducio ad absurdum argument. I made no statement about how magic works; merely implying that tying magic to logic is unnecessary and possibly absurd. You are wrapping yourself around the axle with your own assumptions.