rjshae

I vote for making high Dex/moderate Str characters be a half pixel skinnier.

New, original characters is my preference.

Something that would be nice to have is a mode that lets you 'jump' the party to a location on a map that you have already explored. If the game could do a path-finding check to make sure the party doesn't get intercepted during the walk, then there's no reason you couldn't just move the game view location then have the party instantly walk into the area from the screen edge. Perhaps accompanied by a graphical effect or a sound to indicate traversal of the intervening distance.

I'm okay with the developers including AI options that we can turn on or off, per player preference. The DA2 game was decent in that respect, as was NWN2 for that matter. That way I can focus on the group tactics and the key elements of the battle, such as when the fighter should switch to power attack mode or whether the mage should toss one of his higher level spells. What I don't want to be doing is constantly pausing the game because one of the party members was doing something stupid, like breaking formation to go run after something.

I didn't have an issue with the slow rate of wilderness exploration in BG. But there are probably a couple of things that amplified the slow marching rate: The first was the enemy reaction: if you progressed in small chunks, then you were more likely to encounter just the outlying members of a larger group. Low level characters die easily, so it felt more sensible to whittle down enemy forces a few at a time. But if the enemy AI had caused them to react as a group, then this behavior would have been pointless. The second was the disruption in formation caused by the party movement. Characters with lighter armor moved faster, so that meant the "weaker" party members usually got there in the van of your expedition. Moving larger distances only increased this discrepancy. If you weren't careful, you could end up facing tough opponents with your wizard and thief while the fighters raced to catch up. It'd have been nice if first contact with the enemy automatically kicked in a "reform party" action. Alternatively, the cross-country movement could maintain a cohesive marching order. I did notice that when I replayed it later, the wilderness exploration went much faster because I already knew what to expect.

Adding in damage absorption in PE makes that +50% critical hit damage more effective. Suppose you have a base 2-8 damage, giving a 3-12 critical hit damage. A -4 damage absorption means the maximum normal damage is 4, whilst the critical hit damage is 8 and there is a greater chance of inflicting damage with a critical hit.

---

The JRPG Tales of Destiny revolved around the concept. There was also a "Sword Familiar" in Castlevania: Symphony of the Night. Nothing psychotic or evil going on in either case. Okay. I don't doubt but that you could make an entire CRPG centered around an intelligent weapon, perhaps with it serving as your Avatar. It might even get to be fun after a while being a talking symbiotic sword.

I'm not going to claim I'd have been wholly happy or sad in regard to this. I see the good reasons for why they came up with it, and even agree with them to an extent. However . . . I'd also have missed it a bit for my own reasons - I like characters being punished for overstepping their bounds, not even being able to hit something as a result. I'm okay with this though. I do understand that low level miss miss miss fest concern, so, if they'd gone as described, at least I'd have understood the logic. As Napoleon said, Chance is the providence of adventurers. Personally, I don't mind it when certain encounters require a high degree of luck; if anything that usually just makes me optimize my odds with better tactics and the heavy use of potions and other expendables. But no matter; I'm sure I can live with whatever combat scheme they come up with. I just hope it doesn't feel too contrived.

What, you've never gone wading waist deep in swamp water that is home to poisonous snakes, giant boas, and crocodiles? No, that's not scary at all.

A grid/tiles with terrain effects isn't exactly new or innovative. You've just described pretty much every turn-based strategy game's map for the past 20+ years. Let me just jump into Civ V for a moment and... There, now I've got a Hoplite fortified on a hill, yes, the hill cut the Hoplite unit's movement rate by half, but it also gave it a significant combat bonus. That in itself doesn't really apply to random encounters, does it? You're really addressing the concept of terrain effects rather than the concept of random encounters. Why would terrain effects be limited to random encounters? And that's an awful lot of villages for a land with no food sources, farms, etc. Hmm... kind of a stupid argument, frankly. First, I never claimed a grid arrangement was new or innovative; only that it was a good approach. Second, you're saying we shouldn't use good ideas from an entirely different game genre? Nonsense. Thirdly, I never said we should apply every concept from turn-base strategy games. A grid allows you, the player, to access the entire map while implementing movement costs and allowing the player choice. It does not preclude the developers from implementing random encounters, but it does allow them to apply random encounters that are appropriate for the terrain type. It is also readily extensible by modders.

"Are we there yet?" No. "Are we there yet?" No. "What about now?" ... Noober, the sword of heya.

Yeah, the SoZ system was decent. But remember it did run on a 3D landscape; I'm not sure how plausible implementing that would be for PE. Besides, the Day/Night system on the overland map was completely wonky.

I'm all for adding in terrain effects on movement and concealment. Flooded areas are nice for a little paranoia effect; you never quite know what's going to leap up and bite you.

Another really nice option is an overland map that is sub-divided into regions. Kind of like this screen shot from Eador: Each region would have it's own environmental conditions, movement costs, hazards, and so forth. Within some of these regions are clickable destinations, or maybe just abstracted sites such as inns or villages.

I'd hope that these will almost never happen to a competent warrior. Having a critical miss on one in twenty swings just seems way too high: the fighter's skill should play a big part in the outcome.

Sigh, I hate to do this, but.... It's rogues, not rouges. Rogues are devious people; rouges are powders that eighteenth century french prostitutes used to put on their cheeks. Fighters wear full-plate; they know where to shove the pointy thing. Also, can I suggest using a recent version of Firefox so you've at least got a spell checker available? I get the feeling he's not a natural English speaker. Not too huge an issue so long as he's trying and you can more-or-less work it out. A spell checker won't help with things like "rouge" and "where" and the Firefox spell checker says that "mages" isn't a word, anyway. Well, my apologies then, but the use of "rouges" just keeps recurring up so I wanted to make a small point of it.

Sigh, I hate to do this, but.... It's rogues, not rouges. Rogues are devious people; rouges are powders that eighteenth century french prostitutes used to put on their cheeks. Fighters wear full-plate; they know where to shove the pointy thing. Also, can I suggest using a recent version of Firefox so you've at least got a spell checker available?

By itself, a "critical miss" always seemed like a silly thing; intended more for the gamer's amusement than for anything constructive. What I wouldn't mind seeing is a "critical miss" that allows the opponent a favorable opening. If an enemy attacks me and flounders badly from my crafty block, then that should leave me a brief, favorable opening. Perhaps even give me an opportunity attack (or opportunity counter-attack, as it were). Otherwise... shrug. I can live without a "critical miss".

As the player you're essentially doing the thinking for six different characters. The only way to realistically play it as a "twitch" game would be to slow the action down to one-sixth normal, which wouldn't be fun at all. So no, even on hardcore mode, I still want my pause button. If you want to play hardcore mode without a pause, then do so... and good luck to you.

Ranged defense could be treated as a "Concealment" effect (with suitable adjustments for player skill). That would provide a "hit or miss" binary. Once you score a success, you can then check the result against the Concealment success range to see what type of hit you got.

It sounds like a type of mini-game. Not really high on my list of gaming interests.

I'm thinking the benefit is primarily for attackers with low odds to hit. Take, say, 1d6+1 non-absorbed damage (for average 4.5 or 1 point half-minimum) and a 10% chance to hit: With min dmg of 1: .9*1 + .1*4.5 = 1.35 average With no miss dmg: .9*0 + .1*4.5 = 0.45 average That's a 1.35/0.45 = 300% damage improvement rate. Now take the same damage and a 50% chance to hit: With min dmg: .5*1 + .5*4.5 = 2.75 average With no min dmg: .5*0 + .5*4.5 = 2.25 average. That's a 2.75/2.25 = 22% damage improvement rate.

The degenerate case where the "always hit" mechanic makes less and less sense is when the defender becomes exceedingly small. If you're fighting, say, a tiny but powerful sprite that is moving around rapidly, then logically you'd have a decent chance of a clean miss. Said tiny sprite may only have a single health point, meaning a single swat could take it down. If you're wielding a powerful weapon with a decent magical modifier, then the sprite goes down pretty quickly even if you keep missing.

An 80% chance to hit is a 20% chance to miss; IIRC, three consecutive misses is (.2)^3 = 0.008, or 0.8%.