rjshae

I've done a fair amount of building using the NWN2 toolset, but I was open to switching to the DA tools. Up until I played the game... then I went back to NWN2. DA just seemed to lack a lot of the flavor that comes with the D&D system in NWN2, and the benefits of newer technology didn't make up for it. I had heard that there was a project underway to port BG2 to DA. I'm not sure if that is still in the works (other than the release of Irenicus' dungeon). They've got their work cut out for them.

Especially when wielding the great two-handed grimoire...

Well, the point of a pawn shop is to get a quick loan in exchange for some object/s of equal or usually greater value than the loan itself, with the pawnbroker/shop getting to keep the object/s if you fail to repay the debt on time (which is usually a short-term.) You don't get a discount on anything for pawning things, and items of little/no value are flat-out rejected. That aside, no problems have been solved because you haven't provided an alternative source of income for players. It's trade that generates income. Even high lords typically made money by selling off surplus produce farmed by their slav-err serfs. They could levy taxes, but who is the player going to tax? Are we going to be operating "protection" rackets in the Big Cities? I kind of like the idea though. Having a class of medieval peddlers or solicitors that buy goods for later sale would be an interesting change of pace. Money lenders that take items as collateral may likewise be willing to perform straight-up trades of goods for gold.

I'm still wondering about attack forms with a reach ability. Will those have extended Engagement capabilities? What about Ropers, Ents, and giants with long limbs?

Funny thing about disarming: in NWN2, Disarm was a creature blueprint setting that was set to off by default. Thus it only worked if the builders remember to turn it on. Boy, that was sure a waste of a feat. But I guess they had to make it a toggle-able setting since monster attacks were modeled as equipped items.

Mmm... nope. It's any combatant with a melee weapon.

Yes I agree it is a little odd, but I get the sense that the effect comes from the energy release rather than from the impact. In other words, it may function like a melee "touch" attack with the book acting as the focus. Just having a wimpy wizard whack somebody with a dusty great tome probably isn't going to result in quite the same transfer of momentum.

Aye? Okay, thanks, I'll give it a perusal.

3.5e

I've got a ton of old D&D material (magic, creatures, lore) and I'm contemplating starting up again with Pathfinder. Can somebody relate how hard it is to port between the two? I'd like to find out if the task is hopeless before investing heavily. Thanks.

Bean Counters: Origins

Wait, what? An intelligent, enchanted weapon is not absurd? Having a mundane weapon level with the character more absurd than most, if not all other magic concepts. But I do think it should be a rare thing. There should just be something about the weapon that sets it apart; perhaps it made a life-saving critical hit against a magical monster, or spent time at the bottom of a magical font, or served a noble cause a holy crusade, ...

Perhaps while dealing with a merchant, your goods fall into these categories: High interest (75%) -- items that are similar to those the merchant stocks, guaranteeing a quick and profitable resale. These are items that are low in stock yet match the specialty of the merchant. Moderate interest (60%) -- these may stay on the shelf a while or might not bring as much profit. Typically these would be items the merchant already possesses in abundance. Marginal interest (45%) -- the merchant would likely need to seek out another to buy the item, incurring additional costs. These include items that are outside the specialty of the merchant. Cautious interest (30%) -- these are items that will significantly stretch the merchant's budget, requiring special handling, loans from a money lender, and perhaps hired guards. Avoid -- refuses to stock items of this type. The category determines how much the merchant is willing to spend for an item from the PC (in terms of a percentage markdown). The party inventory list could show flags corresponding to the categories above. Repeatedly selling the same type of item to a merchant can change the item from primary to moderate, then to marginal.

^^^^ What about swarms? Would they have a single engagement slot? Or do they automatically engage all adjacent enemies?

In my mind, degenerative gameplay is bad when it's the optimal solution for completing a game, and the game is therefore deliberately balanced against that play style. Because of this approach to balancing, any other path through the game may not allow the desired result of completing the ending. I'd rather have some constraints applied that allow for more flexible play styles while still permitting successful completion. Does that make sense? I know I've experienced some frustrations over this factor in the past.

One persons "boredom" is anothers preferred method. Whether youre bored or not was completely up to you to control. Dont want to walk back and forth? Then dont. Dont want to rest? Then dont. Dont want to...I think you see where this is going. Unfortunately, the "choices" everyone around here like to trumpet have been taken away and replaced with one and only one method of playing, Sawyers way. All to save people that cant control their actions. Fair enough, but hopefully the added 'Expert' node will address your need for such... activities. We'll see...

Every single game mechanic released so far is "healing the symptoms". Rest too much? = Dedicated rest spots. Walk back and forth for loot? = unlimited inventory. Get sad because your level 1 toon misses sometimes? = only 5% chance to miss. Like to heal between fights? = No field healing mechanic at all. Grind for experience? = no kill experience. All of these (except missing) were controllable by the players themselves until "Dur, me cant control self" somehow became a legitimate excuse and requires programs to cater to their compulsive disorders. I don't get the sense that the current "engagement" mechanic is healing a symptom of game play behavior; it's more like a more realistic tactical element that you need to overcome. The other mechanics just seem to be a method of providing verisimilitude while minimizing boredom. Walking back and forth to carry loot is dreary behavior and I'm happy to see that mostly go away. Frequent resting while inside enemy territory is dull and unrealistic.

Everything I've been seeing and reading about this turn-based FRPG has been pretty sweet so far. Check out the media page: http://www.chaos-chronicles.com/media/ and their updates: http://www.chaos-chronicles.com/ Looking forward to this one...

Yah, that one's kind of disturbing in a Hostel 1&2 sort of way. Not really interested in playing it now.

Yes, that's impressive. It's likely much more detail than PE will actually need for PCs though. But perhaps giant creatures will be large enough to show something closer to that level of resolution.

Can I become a money lender then loan some money to a merchant so she can buy all my crud?

Silence. Okay... I did a little thinking and here is what seems to make sense: I'd like to see a 'retreat' mode that puts you in a defensive stance and causes you to retreat out of the engagement radius following each melee attack. If the enemy doesn't follow up the attack and there are no other engagements, then you become disengaged. If you are not attacked during the "round", then you automatically back away from the engagements (if possible) without penalty. For a reach weapon, it would be logical for engagement to be prioritized by proximity. You want to threaten the most threatening foe, which is usually the nearest. The nearest enemy contacted (with a free engagement slot) incurs the automatic engagement. Enemy AI should then check for an existing engagement before automatically engaging an opponent. That leaves engagement slots open for other opponents.

Speak softly and carry a big book! That will certainly be a novel tactic; perhaps turning your character into a serial killer.

It sounds like a nice mechanic; somewhat like the old wargaming "zone of control" mechanism. It will make combat much more tactically interesting. However, a few questions occurred to me: If a defender is engaged, shouldn't they be able to perform a slow fighting withdrawal, at a defensive bonus, simply by gradually pulling back while keeping their weapon and shield at the ready? I think D&D solved this by allowing a single square of movement without incurring an opportunity attack. Suppose an enemy has a reach weapon, such as a swiss pike. Will the radius of engagement be correspondingly enlarged? If the enemy has a reach weapon and more than one engagement slot, will he be able to engage an adjacent opponent and one further away? If you move into the engagement radius of more than one opponent, do they all engage you and thus collectively decrease their available engagement slots? This seems like a way for a party to pin down opponents, allowing others to slip past. Thank you for the update!