Jump to content

Wirdjos

Members
  • Content Count

    234
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Wirdjos

  1. After reading through three pages of people lauding absolute freedom in party composition, I was getting worried I was the only one that appreciated party balance. Of course I don't want to be restricted to keeping a particular class or build with me, but I do want to notice that I don't have it. If I roll a full party of rangers, I want to notice that I don't have access to extremely useful wizard spells. I still want to be able to play the game fully whatever I choose party-wise, but I do want to be at least slightly punished for making strategically poor decisions. If only to add to the wil
  2. I think that concept just might be. Not counting the mention in the post you quoted, here are two other posts that point to a 'bad in combat' mentality. Perhaps instead of talking about another couple of classes next update, there could be a new update about noncombat skills and their relation to character builds?
  3. I'm not suggesting the animal companion makes the ranger bland and generic, just that the role of the animal itself should be played by a party member (such as a fighter or rogue) in a party based game. Why not apply most of those bonuses the ranger and animal get from each other to the whole party instead? Are you guys seeing my kickstarter badge? My profile shows it, but I'm not seeing it when I post. That in my opinion would make ranger more supporting character than damage dealer, as s/he would buff other characters attacks instead of his/her own. And in party based game I see
  4. Same here. I'm having this problem as well. Edit: And fixed. Thanks for the help!
  5. Animal companion gives ranger ability to do both ranged and melee harassing at same time, which makes ranger quite unique class. I'm not suggesting the animal companion makes the ranger bland and generic, just that the role of the animal itself should be played by a party member (such as a fighter or rogue) in a party based game. Why not apply most of those bonuses the ranger and animal get from each other to the whole party instead?
  6. So excited to have more information on the classes! Two things I'm worried about: the way Coordinated Positioning is animated is going to be essential to making it smooth and believable as opposed to very "gamey" and I have never been fond of animal companions in party based games. Everything the companion was listed as being for is what the party should be doing, which makes the animal superfluous and kind of useless in a party environment. Just my two cents. How could I forget? I'm placing my vote for the Leaders of the Band. I am most excited about the chanter.
  7. I'm also replaying the Infinity Engine games (a popular thing to do apparently) and I'm far more concerned with pacing than breaking formation in tight corridors. Somehow, don't ask me how, my back two party members(read: fragile casters) often got to my rallying point first. That resulted in more than a few mad scrambles as a tender mage was expected to take on a couple skeleton warriors or umber hulks all on their lonesome.
  8. Would you go more towards centaur-like or straight up quadrupedalism if you were to redesign the vithrack? P.S. Thanks Bobby!
  9. I am an instant fan of these spider-people, the vithrack! Am I sensing a decidedly illithid vibe?
  10. This is extremely important. I'm replaying Baldur's Gate 2 at the moment and apparently Jaheira and Aerie both think that the middle of a combat round is the best possible time for a heartfelt conversation. It breaks immersion everytime while simultaneously causing me to hate a character I'm supposed to be romancing just a little more. Making the the notification system as unobtrusive as possible will have a huge effect on its success.
  11. This stronghold system sounds amazing! I'm a little worried about getting my hopes up too high because it sounds so great. I tend to be a packrat when playing large RPGs. I wouldn't mind having a place to display the things I've collected in my adventures, if you're still taking suggestions.
  12. I cannot believe how detailed you got the characters. Is there a chance of some kind of limited zoom so I can see them better? Either way, I am very happy with the direction you're going, so add my voice to that column.
  13. Those are some interesting implications. But I do have a few questions. Should strength, dexterity, or any other stat interact with such a skill? Should heavier armors like plate have a higher maneuver check and if so should armor dependant classes like the fighter start with points in maneuver. I really like the idea of having an armor skill that does translate to other aspects of the game thus giving incentive for a fail sort of wizard to take it even if he never intended to take on armor. He could later grab some plate as the need arose and thus not feel like he made the wrong choices e
  14. I would lean towards armor skills myself. I'm thinking of something more like armor familiarity. It would function a lot like BG's weapon proficiencies where you got to add a point every couple of levels and become better at using a particular class of weapon. You could still use the weapon class without any points in it, you just weren't able to use the weapon as well as someone who had the points. That could translate to movement speed and stamina drain when wearing armor (which I am also in favor of). Add a point to plate armor and reduce stamina drain and increase movement speed while wear
  15. Well that sounds like a post for the creature's thread in general discussion. I even found an artist's rendering.
  16. Sounds like a great idea, Hormalakh. It would definately add depth and characterization to dialogue. I wasn't sure about how it was going to work UI wise, but Lephys solved that as far as I'm concerned. I like the idea of long and complicated dialogue chains as long as they are well marked. The only other way I see to look at is by allowing tone to exist as something that can be chosen alongside dialogue. Your character would still make the same statement, but if you chose intimidate you'd move forward with a hand on your weapon or just speak the lines in a quite gentle voice if charm was ch
  17. While I like the D&D edition troll, I'm not totally partial to it. When I hear troll, I think ugly and gnarled. I don't need agility, nature affinity, or even green skin. Give me warts, skin that looks thrice baked, and long, crooked noses. As long as they're an ugly sight to behold, I'll be happy. Being giant doesn't hurt though.
  18. Ironman mode is a way of playing I might try on a second playthrough of a game I really enjoyed. After understanding the way the game plays and what it will allow me to, I might prevent myself from using something that made the game easier. Perhaps I'll only allow one save or never use a potion or something of that sort. Something to push myself and make the game harder. I've never understood the need to create a game mode to enforce that choice though. It sounded like you were asking a more philosophical question about the concept of Ironman mode, OP, so that's how I tried to answer. I wo
  19. This could be used to further emphasize what I imagine would be the lesson of the whole mechanic. Pay attention! Infections scream it at you by punishing you for not listening to questgivers and party members. The diseases themselves then punish you for not noticing that one of more party members is getting weaker and weaker. Finally the solution to the problem could be that if you paid attention to 'trash drops' and bothered to read their descriptions before tossing them out, you would have noticed what they were used for and already had the cure in your pocket. I really think this mechanic h
  20. This sounds amazing. If this were the case, I would avoid it in my first playthrough, discover this were the case through metagame knowledge, and purposefully get infected to experience this content in a second playthrough. The only issue I have with it, and it's one I'll ignore to get what you describe, is that disease would have to be relatively rare to avoid becoming a maddening nuisance. I did like the idea of different diseases being a somewhat common tool to spice up combat and force players out of using the same tactic for (nearly) every battle. What do you invision as far as the mi
  21. The internet makes it difficult for me to figure out sarcasm. Is this sarcasm or not? I assume giving the information to the player before hitting them with the mechanic would prevent a good number of ragequits and reloads because it would have that effect on me. I would feel like I deserved the damage and move on from there. I'm interested to know if it would have the same effect on many other players. Yourself included, PrimeJunta.
  22. I agree with this sentiment, but it requires a little examination. This is what Maggotheart said in relation to reloads. Now I agree that noticing a mechanic is causing reloads, expecting the player to act that way and doing nothing, is lazy design. However, that doesn't automatically mean the mechanic is a poor one and should be replaced. In the case Maggotheart puts forth, the player gets frustrated, but learns something and changes play style after reloading. Now the latter half of that is good design. The player learns something about the game and actually changes behavior. That s
  23. These are the sort of reasons I would prefer disease to a regular debuff or curse. A contagious disease, especially if it can hop between the player's party members (as maggotheart suggested), forces you make different tactical decisions. If the disease develops quick enough, it could change the entire course of the encounter. Say this particular rat spreads a disease on contact that lowers intelligence and wisdom. You can easily cure the disease after the battle, so you send your fighter up front and let him take the hit. Int and Wis don't affect his ability to attack so it's fine, just k
  24. I think combining the above quote with General_Azure's suggestion of keeping disease a quest related thing presents an interesting solution to Gfted1's (very legitimate) complaint. P:E is suppose to take place in an atmosphere like the point in history when the Old World was discovering the New World, right? What I'm thinking is that there is this secluded, uncontacted area in which there is a disease that noone in the outside world is prepared for. (like those two historical peoples dealt with) You have a quest there and with every melee attack from the people of this place, you have a ch
×
×
  • Create New...