Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About BronzeSphere

  • Rank
    (1) Prestidigitator


  • Pillars of Eternity Backer Badge
  • Pillars of Eternity Kickstarter Badge
  1. My question is simple: how strongly are developers morally bound to respect some aspects of the stretch goals? I'm talking about game design propositions like adding in X number of classes or races, etc, and not about purely technical things like translations. Is Obsidian limited to what's has been put forward for the stretch goals that are finally reached? I guess not. But can they, during the development of the game, remove a class that was set to be part of a stretch goal, despite some backers likely to have backed the project based on those expectations? Can they reduce the number of c
  2. I think it would be great. Could perhaps be a non-combat skill too, so one of your characters can adjust wearable equipment on the fly. I also think that not all pieces of clothing/armor worn by an enemy should be lootable. For example, if you kill a bandit equipped with a thin leather armor with a fireball, his clothing shouldn't be in a good shape. It could either be repairable or totally unusuable.
  3. If romances are in, I want them to be dependent on factors unknown to the player, such as: - Stats (some companions may be attracted by brute force, other by intelligence, etc.) - Decisions (moral choices, for example) - Combat feats - Some other weird fetish companions might The key is that romances should be triggered spontaneously and something you have some limited degree of control over. Also, please don't include Bioware-style forced bisexuality. Companions, at least most of them, should have a definite sexual orientation, just like they should be attracted to certain type
  4. I agree with the first sentence, but for me it's a big no on everything else. Locks of varying difficulty, sure, but players shouldn't be punished for trying something difficult early on. For me, getting locked out of a chest is a reload situation. I want to explore everything everywhere; the game should never close off avenues of exploration for anything other than narrative purposes. For example, if I choose to kill the bandit chief and burn down his hut then sure, the trapdoor leading to his treasure room is buried under rubble and I can't get to it. That's fine, that was my choice. But if
  5. Regarding lockpicking: I feel a lot of games rely on a lockpicking system way too much as a way to put cheap hurdles in the player's way. For PE, I would want it to be a restricted skill. Only characters with high DEX (or whatever stat is the closest to dexterity) should have access to it. In real life, if I'm not very good at doing precision work with my hands, I wouldn't be able to lockpick, period. I also feel that lockpicking skill progression should rely on experience as much as skill points. That is, you begin being only able to lockpick easy locks, and if you try a medium or dif
  • Create New...