Jojobobo

It really depends on how it's done. The monster or whatever should be able to be dealt with in a fashion if it's not killable such talking it down, sneaking past it, etc, which many have already suggested. Or maybe you could have it so that if you charged in to a battle you would die without a chance, yet the monster had some sort of anathema that meant if you were clever you could defeat it in some sort of way (even if you didn't "kill" it - maybe you render in harmless or banish it somewhere, etc.). This should probably only be in the game once though, as it could be annoying/frustrating.

I'm pretty sure in one of the interviews someone mentioned that they should allow options to make the game workable for one handed people; so I'd be surprised if they tailored a set of controls for people with only one hand but had no options for left handed people.

Naah, I got lazy. But yes that is a nice example of how Arcanum dealt with it.

People are only talking about strength and constitution decreasing with age, maybe different races should have different attributes that get reduced with age. So for the dwarves as they age their dexterity decreases - they become stiffer, less agile on their feet; the aumaua might lose intelligence as they age due to dementia like effects, etc. It would be one of those touches that would help make the races more separate in feel. Even if changing PC age isn't an option, different kinds of age degeneration might be fun lore wise.

So I was curious if this issue bothered anyone else or not: Say you are given a quest, and it is forever out of your means to solve because of how you've built your character. You didn't realise this when you accepted the quest, and now you don't have a save you can revert to before you took it on as the realisation it is now impossible only dawned on you quite late. Short of killing the quest giver which for this example you don't want to do - maybe they're a really useful merchant or something - you cannot fail the quest. It is always going to be there in your journal, staring you in the face for the rest of the game, almost mocking your inability to accomplish what a different character could. This bothers the crap out of me for no particular reason apart from I like resolution. Even if I fail a quest, that's more resolution than not being able to do anything about it at all. I hate looking at pointless quest entries in my journal every god damn time I open it up, and there's quite a few games where this has happened to me in the past. Does this irritate anyone else or is it just me? Solutions that spring to mind are for one have all quests solvable by any character type or if they're not then the quest isn't open to that character type in the first place. Or just have another means of failing the quest short of killing the quest giver. Maybe there are others, I don't know and I don't particularly care; all I care about is there is some means of resolving every quest for every character even if that means failing the quest. /rant

Not having read the entire thread I don't know if this has been touched on, but anyway. I do think main quest NPCs should be killable, but I also think there should be multiple NPCs who you can progress the main quest with (ideally three or four). That way if you did find someone horribly insufferable then you could kill them and still progress. If you decide to kill all the main quest givers, then too bad, but why would you want to apart from maybe a single time for laughs?

I don't think older characters should have more "wisdom", wisdom is something abstract and not really related to character capabilities (well, unless they make wisdom an attribute of course). More skill points would be the way to go, as it's hard to argue against the fact that an older character simply has had more time to learn things than a younger character irrespective of how wise they are or not.

I'd like to see the monsters and architecture of different regions to be inspired by different cultures - past or present. A whole island with a Greek theme going on would be cool.

An elf modelled around Patrick Bateman. It would be the coolest thing ever.

A day and night cycle just like Pokémon. In fact the more features from Pokémon that can be used the better, imagine capturing Orlans in P:E balls and then making them fight to the death - that would be awesome.

Depends how detailed the NPC sprites are going to be and how in depth their animations are. If you can clearly see what they look like and what they're doing there's not a great deal of need to describe that.

I do agree that combat barks shouldn't be overbearing. Still at the same time I won't be happy if I don't have a character who shouts out something like "I am INDOMITABLE!" every once in a while.

I want to play a morbidly obese Orlan - so fat they can barely move and have speed penalties. He'd be a barbarian, and when he was raging he'd roll down hills into people's legs.

CoD, natch. *makes machine gun and explosion noises like a child*

Maybe you could have an age scale in the game, where on one end your character is young (higher attributes due to fitness, less skill points due to lack of worldly experience) and on the other they are old (lower attributes yet more skill points). Might be fun to play an oldy. On a related note, different races should have different age ranges or a different starting age if that were to be fixed (which I think is something curryinahurry was touching on). In Arcanum for example a young mature half-orc was supposed to be aged 10 originally as orcs just grew up faster (where for elves this age was 200) - but this had to be taken out of the game due to the character being able to engage in sexy times and the uproar it would have likely caused.

Essentially, what Piccolo said. I read a while back on a different thread that someone (I know, I'm being very specific) said that characters shouldn't grow exponentially into super human attributes like they do in most games - and with this I wholeheartedly agree. It would be nice if attributes were either entirely fixed, or you could only up then by about four or five points the entire game - basically not oodles of attribute points. Also, rolling does sound pretty wonky to me - it's just a slap in the face to anyone who spends time planning out a character (like me) only to have a bad roll at the start. I don't even think it should be optional, as it's just encouraging unfair difficulty - if people really wanted to hamper themselves there should be the option to leave attribute points unassigned both at character creation and later (and also be able to lower attribute points at creation). There you've made the game difficult for yourself but it was your choice and not random chance.

Are they not currently firmly in the hands of the developers? Did I miss something? This is a forum. It is not a manual for the developers and not a list of demands about what they need to add to make their game any good. We are all powerless in what they choose to add, and thankfully so, since if we did have any actual power over content our collective and contradictory nagging would probably make the developers long for the good old days of publisher control. Yet if, given this reality, we choose to say nothing at all about our hopes and expectations for the creative direction of this game, why are we even here? Again, this is a forum. We discuss things here. it doesn't mean we are demanding things be added or removed; it means we express our views and, maybe every once in a rare while, a developer passes through, sees and agrees. Or doesn't agree. Or doesn't think twice about it. Whichever. We aren't discussing it so a developer can see it but because we're interested in the game, do not currently have the game, and so instead channel that excitement and interest into chatting about it and what it may or may not do. So yeah, I hope we see a lot more threads in which people talk about what they want to see in the story or what they want to see from the characters. Just so long as they lack any power to enforce those views, the more the merrier, and it would be pretty dull around here without such discussions. I can see your point, but I don't think the fans are entirely powerless; majority public opinion certainly helped shape the stretch goals a lot whilst funding was still open and lead to the inclusion of some goals that not everyone may have necessarily wanted. I guess I just don't want to see something shoehorned into the game or removed abruptly because that's what the fans say they want and the developers do have an obligation, when really the game might turn out stronger if some things that aren't popular were just left in or left out as they mesh better with the rest of the setting or mechanics, etc. Still, I apologise as this greivance doesn't really belong to this thread as you're right this is more of a discussion than anything else. I think we can all agree that really stupid clichés that have been done to death probably shouldn't be in the game, or if they are acompanying the cliché there should be some sort of twist or innovation.

I'd rather leave the story and the clichés that are or aren't used now firmly in the hands of the developers. They all have a great creative nous and the experience to know what they're doing, it seems unnecessary to instruct them continuously as they well aware of how to make a good story. I guess if people had an inspired suggestion then it's worth making a thread over but to tell them - reading between the lines - that they shouldn't do anything stupid is pointless. Plus playing a game that has a story which is too avant-garde and hipster is just as annoying as playing one that is full of clichés and uninspired. You need that perfect balance of familiar (even cliché) story elements coupled with some curve balls to make the story relatable and at the same time engaging.

Not read all the posts in this thread so it may have been covered - but what I want is a Arcanum style journal. Very similar to the Baldur's Gate style but with a bit more sorting to it.

I would really like to see trapping done in an interesting, unique and useful way (which has IMO never been seen in crpgs yet) - rangers are the class for that. More scripted dialogue/events for rangers due to greater knowledge of the wilderness - sure, I'm down with that too.

Flagellants are very cool, but as a subsect for regular monks. Having them as an entire class is way too niche - not everyone gets as excited by mortified flesh as I do.

Sorry, forgot about NG+, should have really stook that in the poll too.

I don't think them being popular in current media is a good reason to exclude them. You may as well say that because elves are pretty much in all fantasy games and literature ever that it's ridiculous PE is including them and they should try something new (not exactly the same situation, but not too far from the mark). My point is not all good ideas are original ideas, and if PE did have them in the game I'm sure they'd have a take on the myths that we've never seen before.

So, after the last main quest do you still want to be able to adventure? Personally, I would as I don't like feeling like the world stops once the last quest is done. However, this might not work with some endings (those where you character ends up in another dimension, an apocalypse occurs or that sort of thing) and it can sometimes make the ending less climatic (the ending slides of the Fallout series of how you changed the world certainly wouldn't have the same impact if you could strut around the world afterwards). Also to make this work the devs would have to put time aside to make people react to the events at the end of the game (IIRC one of the main reasons JE Sawyer didn't include it in FO:NV), which is made especially difficult depending on how many different endings the game has - but hey that "enhance the whole game" fund has to go somewhere right? What do you think?

I want farmland, and serfs. It'd be nice to feel like your stronghold is self-sufficient and that your character could conceivably retire there after all is done.