PrimeJunta

Why couldn't gunpowder and the crafting of firearms be similar trade secrets?

@Chilloutman if everybody had magical powers, then yeah, there might not be all that much room for technological progress. However if everybody doesn't -- and it's pretty clear that even in P:E not everybody has a soul strong enough for that -- then there'll be just about as much demand for it as in our world. What's more, the traditional pseudo-medieval fantasy world already demonstrates a lot of technological progress. We typically have steel armor and weapons, monumental architecture with arches, domes, and perhaps flying buttressess; we usually have elaborate siege artillery like catapults, ballistae, and trebuchets. We have crossbows, sometimes repeating crossbows. We have complex mechanical locks and traps. And so on. If magic is so universally useful, why did anyone bother inventing those? And if they did invent those, why would they suddenly stop just before gunpowder?

No, Faust was historical. I don't believe real-life medieval magicians could throw fireballs or control plants either. If pseudo-medieval fantasy magicians are legit, why do they suddenly stop being legit when 1400 rolls along?

Come to think of it, consider Skein Steel. That's a combination of advanced metallurgy and animancy -- drawing the soul of a victim into copper, then alloying that with iron and other things to create a super-strong steel. That indicates that animancy itself would be a major driver of technological innovation. Perhaps the discovery of skein steel led to metallurgical techniques that made production of arquebus barrels easier. To continue the real-history parallel, the alchemists Messier-31 mentions were mystics and magicians, but that didn't stop them from discovering formulae that actually worked. Trying to discover the Ultimate Essence or the Philosopher's Stone, they developed techniques for extraction, distillation, purification and so on that proved vital to technological progress.

Or Obsidian just hasn't thought it through. I'm inclined to think that we just don't know all the important details. Obsidian is generally pretty careful with their lore; it would not be like them to leave a glaring hole like this.

How is Renaissance with magic a "mash-up?" Our real Renaissance had the likes of Nostradamus, Paracelsus, and Faust -- these are as close to wizard archetypes as you can find in real history, fer cryin' out loud.

What if not everybody is magically talented? What if permanent magic items are extremely time-consuming and expensive to create? Check the item creation rules in D&D for example -- they cost lots of GP, special materials, and XP to make, as well as quite high levels of magical power.

@Chilloutman and if it did actually, observably, incontrovertibly work, then how would the emergence of guns cause shamans to disappear? Or, alternatively, how would the incontrovertible existence of miracle-workers stop people not thus talented from making technological advancements?

@Chilloutman The majority of the planet's population believes in the supernatural in one form or another. I did a bit of quick Googling and it appears that about 75% of Americans believe in the efficacy of prayer to heal diseases, for example.

@Chilloutman no, but if they could, I don't think it would hurt their career prospects.

@CoOn it's not at all like that for P:E. The maps have to be rendered from 3D in five (I think) passes, after which they can be touched up by hand. Lot more complicated.

I don't think you need to worry. JES has said repeatedly that playing a class against its type is perfectly doable, it just won't be optimal.

Not sure if this is already in, actually, but... reputation and party influence change notifications. I would rather not see them so I don't start gaming that system. I enjoy gaming character and party development, but not narrative-related things, which ruin the narrative for me, and seeing those "Safiya +6 influence" pop-ups detracts from my enjoyment.

Both Edér and the Devil of Caroc are mentioned on the character sheet mockup. That would be unlikely if it's the same person.

I though they used Testacle.

It's too bad if Forton got dropped. I would've hoped he's in, and they got Iggy Pop to voice the combat barks.

I think barbs are more melee crowd control than tank. Their damage-soaking capabilities appear to be relatively limited. Thick Skinned means they risk less when getting beat on, but they'll still drop much faster than fighters (stamina regen, self-heal) or monks (convert Wounds to attacks).

Yeah, that. Anecdote -- I killed one of my PC's during the first fifteen minutes of my first-ever AD&D DM'ing session. Unlucky save against poison. This after we had spent most of an entire day lovingly crafting characters. I was about twelve or thirteen, I think. It was not fun and, like most DM's I think, I learned to cheat with the dice where applicable after that. There was a great bit of advice in one of the Star Wars RPG books, I forget which one. It said that PC's have script immunity. Meaning, they can't get killed unless it's dramatically appropriate. I've applied that to all my PnP campaigns since and I think it's worked out well. Some of my PC's have died, but every one of those deaths has been climactic and memorable. I also liked the IWD2 prologue. It was varied and interesting, and perhaps made the ensuing trash-mob-after-trash-mob grind all the more disappointing.

Character and party building mechanics are a lot of fun to play with. You don't get those in RTT's (much). I did enjoy the combat in IWD a good deal more than in BG 1/2. Main reason is that it felt fairer without feeling nerfed -- fewer sucker punches with less save-n-reload -- and the maps were IMO better designed for tactical play. IWD2 had the same good features about the combat, except it was much more monotonous and repetitive, which wore me down about halfway through. Haven't completed that yet, very probably never will.

Train wrecks are great entertainment though.

Don't forget Anna Akhmatova and Alexandra Kollontai.

Whim. Sometimes I use bad puns. Sometimes I use rude Finnish phrases. Sometimes I make a themed party and think of names that fit the theme. One of my parties was named Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Bukharin, Dzerzhinsky, and Rosa Luxemburg.

Obsidian has a way of building games around new subsystems they introduce, or making the subsystems integral to what the game is about. One of the core themes of KOTOR 2 was the way you build connections with people around you -- and the major new subsystem it introduced was companion influence. One of FO:NV's main themes was faction balance -- and it introduced a pretty sophisticated faction reputation system. MotB had the Spirit Eater subsystem, which was pretty much the point of the whole game. I think a "strategic intelligence" subsystem would fit rather nicely into this tradition -- and I agree that it would be much more impactful if it was as central to the game in which it lived as party influence was to KOTOR 2 or faction reputation to FO:NV. Thing is, the major new subsystem of this type that Obs is introducing for P:E is ... reputation mechanics. In my opinion this would work very nicely as an extension of that subsystem. Your reputation would be reflected in the way people fight you as well as the way they interact with you in dialog.

I am touched by your concern -- really -- and flattered that you want to make this thread all about poor little me, but really, Valorian, I don't merit the attention. So thank you for your kind offer, but I am going to decline it.