rjshae

There are many possibilities. At first I took it to mean that perhaps he's a spy, or something comparable. The best agent is one that doesn't stand out. But, of course, he could just be a wanted man who is trying to hide in plain sight. Maybe he was the son of a noble who survived a purge or an invasion? He could be the bastard son of a deposed king. Shrug.

One things for certain: whatever Obsidian does, somebody is bound to grumble about it. I'd actually like to see fewer monster types with more internal variety within each species: variation in size; differences between male and female or young and old; a few with old wounds, ragged coats, broken horns, or walking with a limp. It can also help to have more realistic AI, with males battling each other, females guarding their young, creatures hunting for fish or digging for rodents, &c. Finally, I'd like it for the creature forms to make sense in their environment: no fire-breathing creatures in a grassy forest please. Thank you.

I agree that Rangers have some elements of the fighter, barbarian, and thief, but then there is overlap between many of the classes. They are probably the ideal scout class, having the stealth of the rogue and the wilderness acumen of the barbarian. In a pitched battle they would perhaps serve as skirmishers or raiders, moving in loose groups and employing hit and run tactics. For either case, shield is little needed and may even be a hindrance. Hence I'd expect them to be experts at fighting without a shield; much more so than a soldier. Rangers would be used to hunting in dense foliage and shooting moving targets, so they would be better at targeting foes during brief moments of opportunity. But I don't think that they would be any better than a veteran bowman at long range.

I wonder whether every individual in the game going to belong to at most one faction? Perhaps you have characters that have weighted faction viewpoints? I.e. 25% Faction A, 50% Faction B, and 25% independent. In that case, the reaction of the character may be more complex; perhaps leaning weakly toward a factional viewpoint, but being open-minded enough not to immediately like or dislike you. Likewise, if you attack a character who is only a partial faction member, perhaps that faction will not immediately consider you hostile?

Worked poorly for "Shaker"... Pretty cheap dude, don't kick people while they are down. This is AMERICA (deep, throaty, GTAVC/SA gun shop voice,) if their idea failed in the marketplace of ideas, then it wasn't a very good idea. Right. Americans only ever buy good ideas. Snort.

Yes. Yes you are. ...in the background an ominous hollow sound leaks from the chimney... a cabinet door rattles on its hinges...

I agree with the OT, and that would actually be a good way to make a settlement seem more lived-in without necessarily detailing every single dwelling.

In contrast, that one really worked for me. I'd expect a barbarian to have unusual customs and garb, and she did. The fin ridge along the crest of her head also made her look a little less human. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Just because you wouldn't find her looks personally appealing, doesn't mean the concept wouldn't work well in this setting.

There should already be skilled crafts-people in the world that are integrated into the economy. In contrast, the party are skilled problem solvers. So I ask the question: what is gained by having the party perform the crafting? I could see a few potential cases: The party is far from civilization and needs to create ad hoc tools because of time pressure. (E.g. antidotes made through herbalism.) The formulae are frowned upon by the establishment, producing goods that can't be sold at a retail outlet. (E.g. banned drugs or toxins.) You possess a rare, exotic formulae and can use it to produce a few high value goods. The item to be crafted can only be used by you or a member of the party. (E.g. potions in The Witcher.) The craftsmen are members of monopolistic guilds that charge outrageous prices. But these are mostly corner cases. In almost all other instances, it's probably more efficient to use the skills of a master craftsman. After all, you want to spend your time adventuring, and leave the mundane tasks of building stuff to others. I'd like it if the game could satisfy that: allowing some unique minor crafting by the players, but leaving the rest to the craftsmen.

That which shall not be named...

I enjoyed the two concept drawings in the current update. They express emotion, action, and a certain cultural distinctiveness. The wizard is a little paunchy with heavy calves, but his face and unyielding posture speak of experience and determination. That all looks good to me. Likewise, the barbarian is leaner and he possesses a reckless drive and courage that would unnerve many a weaker foe. There's nothing to compare them against, so I can't quite get a sense of their size. But I'd guess they have normal human proportions, or perhaps even a little taller. It doesn't look like they spend much time in the water, so the origin of their flesh tones is a bit of a mystery. The only slight suggestion I'd have for improving the illustrations is to add a lot more shading. At present there is little gradation in brightness, so that makes them look flat and a little cartoonish. Then again it's just concept art, and the shadows will show up during rendering.

Can't pass conversation check; need to level up.

Why are you all... urr?

Looks like you picked the wrong day to quit sniffing glue.

Looks like the house is in Poreč, Croatia. Interesting.

I'm a little confused how you came to this conclusion. I don't think anyone said they would have no impact. Significant impact is relative anyhow. They should have an effect but not necessarily a measurable one. A conversation is not a math equation . You can't just say [NPC QUESTION] + [PC ANSWER] x [sPEECH SKILL] = [DESIRED SOLUTION]. Or rather, in most games you can, but you shouldn't be able to. Okay. But if I use a mechanistic skill to open a lock, I see the outcome. If I mix an alchemical brew together based on a skill, I also see the outcome. How will we see the outcome of a Diplomacy skill? If we don't, why would it matter whether we send forth Bruce the Brutish Barbarian to speak or Pete the Polite Paladin? In RL, if you never witness the outcome of your trained abilities, you'll never learn from your mistakes or discover the relative worth of your skill. In that case is it even a "skill"?

Don't be absurd. Fallout 3 [of course] has nothing to do with the example; the imagery alone makes the idea laughable... the physics make it impossible even if they are strong enough to lift it. The video just demonstrates how silly it is. Hmm... you initially failed miserably to explain your point, then call me absurd for me for noting your logical fallacy? Ahh.... right. Carry on, nothing to see here...

If conversation skills will have no significant impact on dialogue branching, then I remain unclear why they are even needed. The only one that makes some sense is a barter skill. Maybe an intimidate/taunt skill for use in combat? As for the Health/Stamina split, perhaps armor will impact each one differently? If so, then you may be able to manage your health loss to some degree. I.e. against a typical weapon, maybe the damage ratio is 1:4 for light armor, or 1:8 for heavy armor.

But will the cloth physics work for the chain mail bikini physics? They may have to jiggle the parameters a little.

Gizmo: Since Fallout 3 does not have a weapon strength requirement, you have failed to demonstrate your point. Besides, a sufficiently strong character (say one with biomechanical implants) should be able to wield that implement.

Eternal Torment.

The game does not need to simulate those elements of the economy in order to tell its story. Just think of them as being located on the parts of the map you can't visit. EOM.

Shrug. Yeah I'm not sure either. It just struck me as probably being overlapping leather or cloth because it didn't have any horizontal joints for bending at the waist.

I think he called it right (about the first sentence being a bit of a Troll). Besides, it was an amusing reply... and there's no need to be so serious, mate.

^^^^ If they use weapon strength requirements in PE, then that approach would make a ton of sense. (Or possibly -1 per X Str points, depending on the scale.)