Caerdon

I don't see the point, really. You could just as well match those 11 classes to 11 players of a football team, 11 spacetime dimensions of the M-theory or 11 Academy Awards Titanic won. There's no hidden meaning to be found here.

So much BS about RNG/randomness here. How "random loot" - or, more accurately, procedural loot - is used in games depends entirely on design and implementation. With a naive, bare minimum implementation PL can indeed result in loot drops that vary from completely useless to inappropriately overpowered, often in a very frustrating manner. A well designed loot generation system can produce loot drops that take all important factors into account, such as party level, enemy level, enemy type, geographical region, party composition & needs, previous loot history & distribution etc. If the devs so wish, a PL system can "fudge" rolls and ensure that specific major encounters produce loot that's an improvement over what the party already has, and/or that such drops happen regularly enough (hell, it can even ensure that every single item is a slight improvement - I just think that'd be a horrible system). It seems to me that the word "random" tends to confuse people: it makes them think that the devs somehow lose control over how loot is dropped, generated and distributed. That's absolutely not the case.

You realise that just mentioning this gives it away, right? Gives what away? I've no idea what you're talking about. Just seemed to me like a knowing an antagonist's gender beforehand would be a spoiler.

But, but.... what about Rogues (melee, not ranged)? My melee Rogue needs a balance between attack speed and protection, to dance around the edges of the battle for sneak attacks. It's impossible to avoid getting directly engaged now and then, and there is also ranged attack damage to consider. And, er... the occasional trap I didn't notice in time, where a bit of armor has saved me from having to reload. I started my Rogue in leather armor in the early game before better was available. I'm currently in high-end padded armor (one of the unique Exceptional ones) and that's working well. On a related note, I have my tank in full plate, but the offtank (Pallegina) is in fancy scale armor for faster attacks. I actually want her doing some damage, compared to the tank who just sits there and absorbs damage without causing much in return. I'm no expert at this game, but it seems to me that mid-range armor is still useful for this kind of thing. Well, I don't entirely disagree, medium armour in many cases isn't a bad choice at all. I just think it should be a bit more desirable choice in general, and the extremes of no armour and full plate should be less obvious choices for certain builds. The numbers in my example were probably too extreme. I was just trying to make a clear point.

Yeah, I was just pulling numbers out of a hat to get the point across. Testing would, of course, be required. I know you like math, so maybe the base recovery penalty R for the basic armours could be derived from a formula like: R = (a * (DR / 12) ^ 2 + (1-a) * (DR / 12)) * 0.5, where 0 <= DR <= 12 and 0 <= a < 1 That, I think, would at least give a nice, smooth distribution to start with.

I'm no D&D expert, but I believe "half plate" is supposed to be like a combination of a mail hauberk, a coif and a cuirass (or something equivalent), which is, in reality, more cumbersome than a real full plate armour. It's not just about custom fit; a hauberk, a coif and a cuirass together would actually weight more than a plate armour, and the weight of a hauberk rests solely on the shoulders of the wearer, whereas a plate armor distributes its weight much more evenly across the whole body. In other words: full plate armor is simply superior: it's lighter, less cumbersome and offers better protection. Obviously it's also more expensive and requires more skill and more advanced understanding of metallurgy from the smith. Of course, what D&D doesn't tell you is that "half plate" existed long before full plate armour. Fantasy settings love to cram everything from viking age to early reneissance into one setting, forgetting that we're talking about a time period of about 800 years.

I didn't forget anything, I just didn't include everything. I was giving an example, that's all.

Easy with the spoilers there, the Master's gender definitely counts as one.

I like engagement in principle, but I also think it should definitely be tuned a bit. You should be able to close in without getting murdered, and circling around the opponent should be possible. And I really don't think engagement attack needs such huge bonuses. Engagement serves a purpose: you can't just dance through the enemy's line - but it shouldn't hamper dynamic positioning as much as it does right now. I do want the mechanic to stay though - just give it some tweaks.

I think the problem with armour is the same as the problem with attributes: the bonuses are linear. This means that if your character values DR more than speed, the heaviest armours are always the best choice, and if they value speed more than DR, plain clothes are always the best choice. Medium armour is nothing but a poor compromise that's not really great for anyone. I want to see medium armour with the best speed/DR ratio so that it becomes a great "default" choice, leaving heavy armor and no armor for those who really want to maximize their tankiness or attack rate. Right now we have: No armour: 0 DR, 0% delay (duh!) Padded armour: 4 DR, 20% delay Leather armour: 6 DR, 30% delay Mail armour: 9 DR, 45% delay Plate armour: 12 DR, 50% delay What I'd like to see: No armour: 0 DR, 0% delay Padded armour: 4 DR, 10% delay Leather armour: 6 DR, 15% delay Mail armour: 9 DR, 35% delay Plate armour: 12 DR, 50% delay Something along those lines.

The humour in this game is drier, wittier and subtler than in BG seriers and I love it. I know humour when I see it, there's no need to underline it.

Honestly, I don't care much which system - unlimited resting with wandering monsters, resting supplies, per-encounter abilities only - is the most realistic or immersive or whatever. What I care about is that from my personal experience the current system leads to good gameplay. It encourages me to think on the long term, to use spells efficiently and economically without going all-out in every fight, and in doing so it challenges me, even if it technically doesn't increase the level of difficulty. In particular, I love that with the current system I end up entering different fights with different resources available, and that's something that many alternate suggestions seem to lack. or c) decrease the amount of spells a wizard can use per-encounter.

Uh... why are you telling me all that? I'm not arguing with you. Yeah, of course you'd want a mace. I was simply commenting on how a greatsword would've been used against an armoured opponent, supposedly in a situation where better options weren't available. I disagree with Luckmann as he says that a greatsword dealing slashing/piercing was there "just in order to cater to fantasy tropes" and that it was primarily used to "crush through armour". Slashing/piercing is exactly what a sword does to lightly armoured opponents - which, historically, would've been the primary target for a knight armed with a greatsword - and a greatsword just isn't particularly good at "crushing" - which is why a knight armed with one would've used other methods against a heavily armoured opponent: wrestling, halfswording, pommel strikes, mordau etc. I agree with most of what you say, but somewhat disagree when it comes to axes. While late medieval axes definitely evolved to take on plate armour, this is not true of all medieval axes (like the Dane Axe and its descendants), many of which were absolutely meant for cutting and "slicing" (or "chopping" or whatever you want to call it). Of the three damage types in PoE, slashing is clearly the closest to what an axe would do to most opponents.

Yup, iMUSE was fantastic. Unfortunately it required a lot of work with all the transitions - and as you noted, not many even noticed it... It would have been great to have had a more robust music system. Unfortunately we didn't have the time or resources to do anything more complex than what is in the game. At one point we did have a combat music that would have let us have intros, outros, and sync points which would have allowed for more variety and would have sounded more organic. But it came online too late and we had to comment it out. Hopefully something to look forward to with Eternity 2 I think I heartily endorse this product and/or service. Seriously, that'd be great. I love little touches like how battle music might change seamlessly back to exploration music. I know stuff like that isn't easy to do, but I sure appreciate it when I hear it.

Agreed. Good thing you brought this up, too - the previous thread must be almost two days old by now.

And again, slashing and piercing is exactly what a swordsman would use against a lightly armoured opponent (including presumably all sorts of fantastical beasts), and a greatsword is perfectly capable of slicing through all kinds of cheeses and melons without exploding them. Against a heavily armoured opponent things would, of course, be different. Piercing would absolutely play a part still - usually preceded by some wrestling and half-swording - but crushing using crossguard and pommel would grow in prominence.

You need to restore Brighthollow, that big nice-looking house. The master's bedroom is upstairs.

Did anyone actually use spellcaster scripts in IE games?

Frustrating, isn't it?

Wow! By that same criteria, PoE is also better than Softporn Adventure!

The last time I checked no one had yet figured out how exactly all the attack/recovery speed modifiers stack, and as a result, there was no established theory capable of explaining the timings from video analysis.

Greatswords would definitely deal slashing/piercing damage to unarmoured targets - and in any case I don't think it'd be a case of fantasy tropes but simply the wish to have all damage types represented. And maybe heavy armour doesn't make you immune to slashing damage precisely because part of the damage comes through as crushing damage. Anyway, slashing damage is already the worst damage type, so it really shouldn't be nerfed any further. Gameplay is more important than strict realism - and I love realism in games.

Make the "verbal declaration of combat" a "Go **** yourself!" and the "visual cue" a finger and you'll get my vote.

When I'm feeling confident: X My archer X Edér XXX Pallegina - Aloth/Hiravias - Sagani/Kana Xx Durance/Hiravias ( - Itumaak) When I'm scared: X Edér X Pallegina XXX My archer - Aloth/Hiravias - Sagani/Kana Xx Durance/Hiravias ( - Itumaak)

Yeah, it has happened to me that the game wouldn't show a particular character's savegames at all. Restarting the game did the trick.