Osvir

I really wish there was an "ROFL" emoticon on this board. Setting aside the fact that you're referring to a comical mascot character whose ability was "Dance," an ability whose results were random and unrelated to illusion magic... Illusion magic has been done before, albeit not sensibly. Ultimately all it theoretically could do is confuse an enemy. Pretty much everything that has been associated with illusion magic in other games seems to fall solidly under the Cipher's intended role. I explain that it isn't the "Dance" I am curious/interested about but the changing of the environmental aspects. The Spell Effect. Illusion magic has been done before but as I can recall it has been done statistically rather than visually. "Poof" suddenly you have -5 on Strength. Why? Because someone threw an illusion spell at you, it didn't visually do anything but statistically and mechanically my character now suddenly has -5 Strength. I can't think of any game where the Spell Effect for an illusion was done good visually. An idea for an illusion spell: Your party gets hit by an illusion spell, I've got the Fighter selected, in his view it looks like all of the team members are fighting him (a coup!). Switch to the Monk and from the Monk's perspective it looks like everyone is going after him. Likewise, an illusion spell should and could make your Health start disappearing as well when you get hit (Only as an illusion). If the field is fiery flamey hellfire your party should take "damage" as part of the illusion. If you dispell the Magic you'll get back all the stamina and such, but if you stay in it your character gets knocked out (dispelling on a knocked out party member would give back all of the stamina as well). Could the UI be affected by illusion spells? I said it in another post, how mean can illusion Spell Effect be?

^Not multiple Scholar skills, but having 1 Scholar Skill that has multiple functions. Likewise (what I'm thinking about) "Thievery" fits into this category as well. Thievery is only 1 Skill, but it has "Lockpicking", "Pickpocket" and "Disarm Traps" functions as well.

I'm not so interested in "restriction" but "advancements". Kind of how a Fighter could be better with a Sword comparatively to a Rogue (to a start) and the Rogue could be better with a Dagger comparatively to a Fighter (to a start).

Specifically to the classes. Is there some weapons that just has an "umpf" in terms of fitting with a Class? The Grimoire as an example, Wizard tool. Is there any other items, tools or weapons that just resonate with a class discipline? Would the Barbarian be better with Axes because they like to be up close and personal and hack and slash? Does classes have an innate practice towards one of the weapon disciplines, because they are devoted to it? Unlike this thread "Outlandish Weapon and Armor" that touches "Exotic"/"Magical" weapons/armors, and also unlike this thread "Armor & Weapon Design A Plea Pt 3" which touches "Realistic" weapon/armor... This thread is a homage to the Classes and below I've brainstormed, top of my head. Barbarian = Axes, Clubs, Two-Handed/Dual-Wielding, Rocks (Big, Throwing), Fists, Polearms Chanter = Megaphone-ish, partiture, Jew's Harp, Harp, Guitar, Flute (Blowpipe?), Ocarina, Staff, Poem Cipher = Crystal, Emblem, "Implants" (alchemic potions and needles~injecting magical essence into veins)... I think the Cipher is most difficult to think about weapons, because the Cipher's weapon is the "Mind". Dream Catcher earrings? Enchanted glows that are special to the Cipher? Strings (to be able to do puppetry stuff) Druid = Nature, Staff..?? Fighter = Sword, Mace, Shield, Axe, Spear, One-Handed, Sword+Board Monk = Fists, Staff, Sword?? Ranger = Bow, Spear, Axe, Sword, Rogue = Dagger, Scimitar, Short Sword, Throwing, Gun Paladin = Hammer, Shield, "The Holy Word" Priest = Mace, Gun, Shield, "The Holy Scripture" Wizard = Grimoire, Lantern, Wand, Staff, Dagger Let's try to make a decent list instead of what I've presented, I understand that everyone will be able to wield everything (from my understanding of Obsidians comments) but is a Fighter better with a Sword than a Rogue is? The Rogue can still wield a sword, but initially (as an innate ability because of Class History/Lore) a Level 1 Fighter is better with a Sword than a Level 1 Rogue? True? False? Are some classes better with some weapons, just like some classes have some abilities that other classes don't have? I would like to say "Yes" (granted, I have no clue). That doesn't mean that a Rogue won't be able to equip a Sword, just that the Rogue would be weaker with a Sword than a Fighter to start off with. A Rogue could become great with a Sword, but never quite as good as a Fighter (the Rogue would become good in his own way). Input?

Why am I thinking about one of the dungeon levels being less graphically appealing than the rest of the levels? I'm talking about one of the levels being an illusion and the perspective becomes completely different, suddenly the world transforms to something like this: This is a great game by the way <3 I can totally see something like this as a random gem in the game, suddenly appearing without much lore to it except some "Wtf??" from your companions and then unraveling the mystery of "The World Suddenly Changing" when finishing the level (Fighting/Solving the illusion at the end of the level). Some Illusionist playing tricks or whatever.

^I agree. Pets is a waste of time, but abilities (Summon Monster/Demon/Spirit/Soul whatever) is not. Likewise, I don't see a Ranger taming a wild animal being a waste either. It would serve the same function (pet), it might not be a dog or a cat, but a wolf or a bear. Maybe even a bird. No dialogue but there could be instances where the tamed animal narratively interact in the party and things that happen. "(IF [Animal] Present at X) = Y". Maybe a tamed wolf could smell the "evil" on an enemy who is trying to be sneaky, someone who says he is someone he isn't. "Smelling the agenda" or whatever. If there are wild animals in the game it is a matter of just giving "control" (in code) to the Player party, making the Wolf "Friendly". The red ring indicating that it is an enemy is switched out with a green ring. In this way, I don't see it as a waste of time. As something mindless that just runs around with you and is pretty much worthless, then no. Personally, if you can become some sort of Beastmaster, then I would like if the animals you tame stick around, and not something you summon. Would also be part of "Mortality" so if you get a Wolf, get some Beastmaster buffs on it (making it stronger than your standard wolf) and you manage to keep it alive for a long time, but when it dies it dies and you'll have to get a new animal to tame. P.S. I was never too fond of "Charm Animal". It was temporary, and you couldn't bring the Charmed Animals with you to another area.. or did I do something wrong?

I think this thread is a pity...

Black Isle Studios working on a apocalyptic thing: http://www.blackisle.com/ 28 days left til they reveal what the PV13 is?

This. I'd also like to add in that it'd be cool if there were ways to directly interact with the world using the UI (clicking+dragging). Maybe be able to click and drag loot to our (Inventory) in the UI (or onto the characters themselves). Cast spells by clicking+dragging. Clicking+Dragging stuff basically, but with the UI in mind (customization?).

To be honest, I wouldn't want a pet, but something that forms in narrative as a companion unlike Forton or friends. I did like the Mabari but it was lacking too, Dogmeat wasn't some majestic dog or war-creature, but a rather frail dog in the wasteland. It didn't matter too much how Dogmeat was presented to us, Dogmeat could've probably have been found at the Bandit Camp, in the Glow or wherever, Dogmeat was a favorable companion in a way that he could be implemented at any point in the game or in any area. Whilst the Mabari was stuck with you as a part of "Lore". Dogmeat was a choice. This is how it could be (brainstorming/trying to be innovative): If the Ranger has the ability to tame an animal for an indefinite period of time, you could tame that bear, or that wolf, to fight with you. For this to be feasible Bears need to be a tough opponent in a fight, and so would wolves (who fight in a pack). Getting a Wolf would be an advantage but at the sacrifice of another skill set. Taming the Wolf would have it with you, but it should be part of "Mortality" like Dogmeat, so at any point in the game where it gets rough your Wolf or Bear dies. If an animal could serve some sort of "Mini-Companion" role where they don't take up a party slot and you can't equip them anything that'd be cool. Just as it would be cool to be able to equip items onto pets. I think that animal (tamed) companions might be easy to handle because they are already in the game, it is a matter of coding the animal to become "Friendly" and last either for "X" amount of time or indefinitely. Perhaps the animal could even gain some sort of "morality" changes depending on your actions, and/or you could use specific [Command] skills to keep it alive longer, [speech] should be a part of it too. Oh yes, you'd be able to get 1 tamed animal companion at any point in the game, affecting your story differently from someone else. "Get a real pet", that argument works on companions as well "Get a real friend". As getting a companion is acceptable in P:E, then simply make "pets" = companions. EDIT: There doesn't need to be any dialogue for it and little to no interaction with it just as well. But maybe a slight change in texture or something as your character with the [Tame] Skill and grows in level.

I think it's a great idea for an action-adventure. Having a depleting resource, that allows your character to avoid attacks by blocking, parrying, dodging even though you haven't reacted appropriately. After the resource is gone every hit you miss actually connects and does grievous damage, impairing combat effectiveness and leading to long-term negative effects. I am not sure that it's going to work so good in an isometric RPG due to the character size and fixed camera, which effectively bring your ability to deliver combat eye candy to zero. Same goes for seeing whether your characters actually grip the sword by the pommel or not. I don't mean to be rude but just want to say "Lies!". What is it with people and the isometric view? "No! It is isometric so it is inferior graphically!!!" or something?

Cartography is part of noticing detail, and articulating it in drawings of a map. So it would or could imply a "sense of detail", noticing the little bits. Reading more about the detail of the world in a book could extend the skill to notice cultural environments, be good at orientating through the thick of forests and be able to decipher maps.

Great post and thank you, Farbautisonn. Maybe wo different Assassin like factions? One more suburb, more slummy and deep darkness lies at the depth of it, shadows of the conspiracy. Rogue-Assassin or Rogue-Thief. Military Disciplined Institution, the Elite Guard and trained Infiltrators and Spies. Ciphers-Assassin or Cipher-Magic.

^Suikoden follows this trend too, and it works very well... in Suikoden (107 recruitable characters~). But that is a vast amount of Companions, in a sense you'll only encounter some companions in some cities, or at a certain point in the game, so you'd be "Level 5" on a standard game meeting Forton for the very first time or whatnot. I can see how some companions can't join you because of level restriction, but for a game like P:E? Perhaps not by a level restriction but by a "dialogue" restriction (you locking yourself out from recruiting for a duration of time, allowing you to change the companions mind or lose that companion forever). I prefer "Objectives" (challenges) required to "Recruit" rather than having some "invisible" psuedo statistic for your characters experience. "Ah! Thou is Level 4, sorry I only go with Level 5's! Shape it up honey, maybe you'll get there someday, some way". I'd prefer it to be statistically challenging to recruit (e.g., a level 3 [speech] allows me to recruit a VIP Companion easier than with having a level 2 [speech]). EDIT: One character might require you to be completely and utterly evil, whilst another one might require you to be good and pure. Sorry for off-topic by the way.

I was going to suggest Path of Exile but googled it first and I just got to say wow. Regardless hrm... Playful Entertainment Slightly seductive undertone, noted.

Silence spells! Also, great answers TMTVL How would silence spells work, likewise, how do you counter illusions cast on your party? Could the entire screen turn "Hellfire!!!" on you and the mobs you were facing transformed to something much much much more intimidating than what they actually are? How do you face that? This should change some battle animations and lower the parties morality.. could a "Dispel" spell be a directed AoE spell that only "clears"* the portion struck and removing the illusion (partially) so you get back normal morality in the area that is "dispelled". *Like having 2 layers in photoshop, erasing the top layer in a circle of targeted area

Sorry. Interesting post, just, that caught my attention. With classes comes the distinction that it is a "way of life". Being a Rogue has little to do with assassination, and is part of a "training" process regardless if it is today or 1'000 years ago. Specific individuals undergoes the process, I'd say they are a minority. "Chosen Ones" in a military, those who undergoes Elite Training in the Military as Spies, Communicators, Infiltrators and Killers. Ninjas are more akin to a Thieves Guild more than being a village of assassins. In fact, a Ninja and an Assassin are two different things too. Being an Assassin implies a "way of life", and a Rogue could do it as a Contract thing, but the Rogue could likewise imply that he is an Assassin, and land a D10 [sneak Attack] grab all gold in advance and not carry out the contract. So if an Assassin is a profession, a way of life, wouldn't that imply that assassination is part of the job rather than a distinct "Rogue"-like behavior? This doesn't exclude that the Rogue could become* a sort of Contracted AssassinHitman through playing the game progressing the story/level up. The nature of a Cipher's ability fit with what is called "PSI Ops" in many other games, in P:E it would be medieval PSI Ops. Fits for a trained infiltrator, as in being military disciplined, perhaps even starting on his/her own. Likewise, a Cipher could be a detective, an advisor etc. etc. the point is that Cipher fits the role as "Trained Killer" that "Assassin" is. *by your choice

This is very close to desires versus difficulty. I'd love for P:E to be designed purely hardcore, and have "Easy" as some "Console" immortality commands a la "Greedisgood #" or whatnot (WarCraft 3, gives # gold)... well...? Then I think "Maybe that isn't a good idea for the general public". Perhaps, if the game is designed hardcore from the get-go it gets easier to make more difficulties? No matter the gap between them. The very first time I played StarCraft 2 I felt "Wow what a big gap!" between Hard and Brutal now I'm playing on Brutal and I'm looking at Hard as "Pfff, easy". Difficulties should wary greatly, and I feel Guitar Hero does this very well. A Gamer gets good at a game quickly, and you might play Chapter 1 on Casual, just to find yourself being able to handle Normal, or even Hard, when you didn't stand a chance the very first time you tried on Normal. Running away could serve a function in design, and then simply scale the encounters from that as a basis (on Hardcore you'd possibly have to run away, whilst on Normal you can, as standard, overcome it). Mortality should be a big business in both Combat as well as in the World of P:E Update #24

I am just implying that certain "types" of creatures being encountered differently for each class/race combination. Not just Undead, but Giants, Humanoid, Four-Legged Wild Animal, Flying, Subterranean, Demonic, Rat-ic etc. etc. An Orlan Rogue getting a penalty by fighting a mini-Ogre in some ways, but also has a few advantages. An Aumaua instead gets the advantage of battle intimidation or something and can stand toe-to-toe with a mini-Ogre but gets some sort of disadvantage towards fighting it too. Following that ideal not only the Priest could have an innate ability to encounter the "Undead", but the Chanter could also have a certain type of way to deal with the "Undead". Do the Classes in themselves (or Weapon Specialization) following some sort of natural martial code which is better against other specifical types of monsters? Is the Mace in itself a preferred weapon for a Priest? And does the Priest have its own "preferred fighting style" which is practiced and taught by Priests? Kind of how Tai-Chi is different from Jeet Kune Do, and practical in different situations and different Disciplines (Does the Priest follow some sort of Martial Discipline tied to its Class?). In that sense, isn't "Crushing" usually the best weapon against Undead? Likewise, blasting with a Shotgun (Shotgun in itself really nails it) usually helps in dealing with the undead. Could the fire animation for the Priest (with a gun) be that of a "Cross" or something similar? Maybe just a "on hit" animation differing per class and weapons~?

Depends on how you look at it, could you be able to implement it not only to the Priest, but various other Class combinations. A Cipher could perhaps have a "tree" or whatever, making it possible to "manipulate" dead or sleeping souls from their deep chambers. A Chanter calling on elder ancient lost souls? I might be deviating the thread a little bit, but how does different types of classes act towards different types of enemies? Does the Orlan prefer to fight up close like the Aumaua do? Can the Orlan handle themselves against a Giant type creature like the Aumaua can? Will a Fighter face a Dragon just like a Wizard faces it?

I really like that idea a lot Jojobobo but it sounds more closely related to plot events and turning points in the game where you decide and make choices ("Should I poison the food or the wine?" type of thing). It sound more related to the Player choice, more so than an active ability. Some ramblings on different mechanics for different Classes/Weapons: * Backstab = ???/??? (all can use it -if- flanking standard attack? e.g., the enemies can do it too making positioning* so much more important*) * Sneak Attack = Rogue/Dagger * Mind Stab = Cipher/Crystal * Aim = Ranger/Bow * Merged and said neanderthalic: Positioning important

Cool! That sounds great. How do you get innovative about it and how could it work for P:E graphically as well as mechanically?

Getting on the same page: P:E Update #24 This is what I like to call a "Shakespeare"-Quote. Everything/Every word is important. A documentary in the actor's studio with... Dustin Hoffman, he explains that his Director first gave him a manuscript that Hoffman studied, then auditioned, then the Director said "Great, now do it again and highlight these passages" (The Director underlined every other word). Hoffman did as his Director told him, which in turn he said "Great! Now do it again and highlight ALL of the passages" (The Director then underlined every word). And that is how important Shakespeare's every single word and work is when you act one of Shakespeare's pieces. Some links to other information/knowledge/insights/thoughts etc and definitely related: Alchemy (Wikipedia) Necromancy (Wikipedia) Shamanism (Wikipedia) There are also scattered threads on the board specifically about Necromancy. Definitely scientific. I view Wizardry as altering scientific fabrics and molecules/atoms and similar, which Necromancy falls into as well (and is a deeper, more philosophical study of the fabrics). Necromancy = A scientist going so far to alter the DNA of someone, or even cloning a Sheep. In some ways viewed as the "Dark Side" of Wizardry.

Curiosity: Truenamers?

Posting first, reading after [done], just wanted to put in this input. Pets and Familiars should be important. The Wolf I tame as a Ranger (if that is possible to do) should be a part of the "Mortality". There should be a limited amount to how many "Pets" I can have at a time (based on Class Level). A Wizard having a Familiar should also be important in this way in my opinion, though lesser Familiars (Some minor demonic entity or whatever) could possibly be summoned "abundantly" (they are infinite, if one dies you can summon another one)... but being able to summon a nasty Demon which you have learned its true name should be a part of the Mortality System (imo) or some Air Spirit akin to Appa or Momo. EDIT: Get your own Boo Foo'. Likewise, perhaps you could get tame an eagle as a Ranger (temporarily, if they exist in the area) that you can manage as its own unit exploring the area you are in *whistles* now with this feature... if implemented... postal service? (or am I taking it way too far?) Temporary Pets depending on area/spells Perhaps even being able to name your tamed Pets & Familiars yourself, so that they get some sort of personal value. This gives us, the players, the ability to have our "Dogmeat" in the party (I managed to keep Dogmeat alive all game <3 honestly though, lots of saving+reloading).