Osvir

This wouldn't work, besides which adding MP is a waste of time and resources, mechanically... Simply, there's no contextual hook between premade multiplayer characters who have no backstory and reactive dialogue options in a PS:T-like game, and then there's no reason at all to allow other players to control existing companions in the dialogue sense because the entire point is that the companions have significant backstory and relevant hooks to other NPC interactions outside a player's control. This is a single-player game. And don't bother suggesting that a multi-player controlled vanilla party should just have reactive dialogue options in the "hive mind" sense all derived from the head party member's control, because we get back to the 2012 developer comments that MP is a bad idea for heavy SP content unless you want crappy MP implementation (and I'd be fine with that--make it real crappy and avoid sacrificing anything in SP). BG2 and PS:T handled "multi-party" conversation a little bit differently, but it's highly contextual to pre-written companion backstory and the given NPC/quest situation. For example, in BG2 you could speak to that one vendor NPC using Jaheira or your PC and the reaction would be different, but if Jaheira did it, it's not like the player had any control over dialogue choices. Or in PS:T you could ask Dak'kon to interact with Fell as translator or you could just do it yourself, with varying degrees of success and control. I didn't say "Make PE Multiplayer". I was speculating that if Obsidian plans their code ahead, maybe they can do some work towards a Multiplayer experience in a sequel. Because I suspect that if Obsidian makes a PE2 they are going to re-use a lot of what they are doing for PE1.

Only the main character can speak.Your companions can speak if THEY want, but it won't be in the players control. It will be like PS:T or BG2 Hormalakh has a point though. And there's also a point hiding in what you are saying: How do the enemies react to you bossing your team mates to do your bidding? More importantly, how would your party members react to this command? Could there be a Morale penalty? Leadership penalty? Is there a "Leadership" Bar in P:E? Is there Morale? For example, Edair might be great at threatening ruffians, but would he threaten the Innkeeper Osmaer? Would he outright neglect you asking him, and even think you are doing the "wrong" thing to even ask him of that? Whisper to Cadegund to charm the guards and she might slap you in the face? I still think multi-party conversations has lots of potential. Thinking a little bit far ahead but, having a multi-party conversation system in PE could set a predecessor for a Multiplayer Multi-Party conversation in a potential PE2.

Yes most definitely, that's what I was thinking. I was just using the Innkeeper as a placeholder. Re-use Villager 1 and Villager 2 and so on. But it would be nice to see if some "unique" Quest givers have some "uniqueness" to them. Or just give Faction Insignia's (in a way placeholders), because the second modders get the hand on it, I am sure many of those insignia's might get replaced with a face instead (Much like Baldur's Gate Conversation mods tbh). EDIT: Just want to clarify to Hormalakh that I meant that the multi-party conversation idea is great.

Yes! And I love that whole concept through and through, it sounds great and looks like it could fit in very nicely. I don't have anything further to add on that, which is why I went straight into nitpicker mode~ personal preference-mode on aesthetics/presentation

Watch it where it isn't blocked Lephys it's not sloppily staggered, it's just... I don't know, it doesn't look like it entirely fits in, which is why I think for it to shine the most it would require some sort of art upgrade to accommodate Hormalakh's suggestion. Something that indicates left side is meant for left-side party and right side is meant for right-side party in the dialogue. My example is sloppily staggered though. There, that should do it more justice.

I think we need to split Summons into different Tiers, which is a little bit what I tried with "Low, Mid and High". Perhaps even adding an "Epic" Tier as a category in itself. Because I am in favor of the Perma-Death Summoning (Summoned Beings that Die), but I am also in favor of a limitless stock. Low Tier Summons - As seen in Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale etc. etc. they never run out, they don't get weaker and they don't really get stronger (unless the Wizard himself is stronger. Maybe he calls out 3 Low-Tier Summons instead of 2 when he reaches a certain level or something). Being able to name them, so you summon "Humpti" and "Dumpti" over and over again for a duration of time (or until you unsummon/dispell them) or until they fatefully die in battle. Then you lose them and you get to summon 2 new ones that you can name "Bolli" and "Holli" or whatever you want. Mid Tier Summons - [Repeat above] High Tier Summons - [Repeat above] Epic Tier Summons - Quest Tier Summons. Something you have to find in the World, perhaps even do battle with and "catch" and "tame". There's only ONE of these in the world, not two, but a single one between all realms. Just like there is only ONE Main Character that you have created. So if this ONE single Summon dies when it is called, it doesn't simply "de-materialize" and disappear into some sort of void, but it gets cracked, slashed, death, it ceases to exist altogether. How would you be able to Summon something that is dead? Necromancy? What I am suggesting is that Obsidian create Quest Content for Epic Summons that are "Unique" Summons in the game that could very well work as a "7th Companion" when Summoned (but for obvious reasons never be as strong or have as many abilities and can't "level up" and can't partake in any banters or whatnot). This whole discussion brings me to some questions: What sort of "Life" rules apply to Summons? What kind of "Soul" do they have and are they Immortal beings that only do their Master's bidding? What is a Summon and where do they come from? What happens when a Summon breaks "free" or is "let go"? Can a Summon live a mortal life in the regular plane or does it dissipate? Is a Summon a Soul? Can you kill a Soul? Etc. etc.

I'm confused what are the pro's and cons of using heatmaps on games, and particularly on PE? Look at the video in the gameinformer link in the first post. It starts around the 2:00 mark and ends at the 2:30 mark. The developer speaks a little bit about how it helps. As for cons, I think it just costs a lot like Tale implies.

@Hormalakh: I think it looks great, but I personally don't like the "mid-screen" Dialogue Lines coming in by Sagani. By my preferences I kind of like having all the text on the left side, unless the conversation box took some pro-your-suggestion-art direction. It is a concept but it looks a little bit "off-put". But it is at the same time a nice addition to kind of separate the two, e.g. everyone talking on the left side has text on the left side, everyone talking on the right side has text on the right side. I just think that it could work just as well by having all text on the left side and simply doing a Color-Border (like you did around Forton) to point out who's talking (not to mention putting a "Forton:" or "Sagani:" in front of the text when he/she speaks). Your idea makes it super clear who's talking, but it "kind of" removes the standard "Novel" experience. -------------------------------You open the door----- -You are greeted by the Innkeeper-------------- -"Osmaer is my name!"-------------------------------- -----------------------You notice a silvertooth------- -------------------"Got some news?"------------------ -"Sure! Can't tell tho"--------------------------------- -------------------------------------"Please?"------------- Etc. etc. In comparison to: -You open the door----------------------------------- -You are greeted by the Innkeeper-------------- -"Osmaer is my name!"-------------------------------- -You notice a silvertooth----------------------------- -"Got some news?"------------------------------------ -"Sure! Can't tell tho"--------------------------------- -"Please?"------------------------------------------------- Neither of the two are pretty writing, they are simply there to convey an image of what I am talking about.

This was exactly my idea! Then you can also have several portraits on the right side too and you can then choose who says/acts the next dialogue option and for those selections that require a dice roll or a attribute check you can have tht particular character make that attribute.dice roll check. This takes me back to memory lane (Character Expressions) albeit dice rolls and attributes checks sounds like a great addition into the conversation. Imagine talking to 3 goons, two of them is dumb but the 3rd one is actually quite intellectual. For whatever reason, one of the dumb ones are the "Big Brother" leader, and you are trying to persuade them that you are part of their Bandit gang (so that you can sneak in for whatever reason). Let's just take the only significant choice: 3: - "I think you should let us pass" Bandit Brother Nr 1 (Leader): "Huh? Okay, well you seem alright..." [insert Attribute Check/Dice Roll] - In code, I don't want some sort of Final Fantasy X-2 "Mission Complete!" Wheel of Fortune to start spinning on the screen *shudders* And in this example the dice roll fails~ Bandit Brother Nr 3 (The smart one): "Now wait a minute bro. These guys smell funny, they not walk like us and not talk like us. Some fishy business...." And now you have to convince the smarter one and he becomes the "Highlight" in conversation on the other side.

Reading this gave me an idea~ <-Portrait on left side courtesy of BelmonteOliveira (some random DeviantArt artist I found by the use of google. Proper sourcing ftw! ) Ofc, I could've cut it better and stuff like that, I only intended to use it as an example/concept. There could be some sort of "highlight" in the dialogue as well. If, let's say Edair, butts into this conversation, his portrait could get bigger for a second or "light up" in some way to indicate that "Here I am! Now I am talking!". Same thing could go with the Left-Hand Side (The Target) you are talking with. If you face a Group of Rival Adventurers or you face a group of enemies, they could pop up several portraits on the Left-Hand side as well (of course). Heck! If you've had a Rogue infiltrate the Enemy party (Stronghold missions, maybe?), they could appear on the Left-Hand side too, and when battle ensues (if it ensues), the Rogue could be a 7th Temporary Party Member (Uncontrollable). Just a few ways^ you could use a thing like this.

And I like choices. So if Obsidian includes choices in class paths/builds, then I hope that we both get satisfied Then I can stroke play with* my rod and you can play up close and prod. * Well that didn't sound much better xD And of course I'd be able to build one Wizard like a Wizard, one Wizard Tank, Wizard Fighter, etc. etc. I do want to try out a Full Wizard party, but for that to be interesting it kind of requires some sort of choices so that they can differ. In Icewind Dale, for instance, I did try a full Mage party. Each and every one of them had their own little uniqueness~ (One was a Diviner, another an Enchanter, Illusionist, Necromancer etc. etc.). I think that a Grimoire style deck-ish thing that I suggested a few posts back could work with this (Put lots of Fire Scrolls in your Grimoire and the Grimoire gets Fire Traits or something). In the same way, if you put lots of Weapon Enhancement buffs or whatnot into your Grimoire and you are wielding a Sword, maybe that could give the Wizard more of a "Warrior" role no? (Put lots of Metal and/or Weapon Related Scrolls into your Grimoire and the Wizard gets better with Metal and/or Melee Weapons?) I might be getting this wrong but I can recall something about the Grimoire being bound with the soul of the Wizard, but that might just be Forum talk~ (I.E. I'm unsure if Obsidian has said anything about this, but I know we've talked about it here). Let's just call this last bit speculation. Regardless, it would then make sense (If the Grimoire is bound to the Wizard's soul) that he would get better at the intended magic if it is transmuted or whatnot into the Grimoire. Put 1 Sword Fighting Scroll into the Grimoire = Wizard becomes slightly better at Sword Fighting.

Obviously, PE isn't an Action RPG. That's not what I am suggesting, but merely the ability to wield 2 Wands for some extra Attack Speed. Instead of 1 Wand Attack a turn, it'd maybe be 1 1/2 Wand Attacks per turn. For an even more (imo) interesting and difficult method: - 1 Wand, 1 Grimoire: 1/2 attack a turn (Attacks once every 2nd Turn) - 2 Wands: 1 Attack a Turn (Shoots one wand 1 turn, shoots the other wand the next turn etc. etc.) Wielding 2 Wands wouldn't make the Wizard be able to throw 2 Fireballs, but merely have the ability to have higher Attack Speed. Furthermore, 2 Wands should also obviously neglect the Wizard to use their Grimoire with full potential, as it would most likely sit strapped around the Wizards hip in an inactive state (or in the "Top of the Pack"). 2 Wands: - Pro: Attack Faster (If Wands counts as Semi-Ranged Weapons) - Cons: Can't use all Grimoire spells 1 Wand+1 Grimoire: - Pro's: Can use all Spells written down - Con's: Can't attack as fast. The reason I suggest this is because I think it gives variety to the Wizard. Having the ability to do a lot of "Suppressive Fire" without any specific "Spell Casting" (which I think could be a bit of a tactical move) with 2 Wands, and also the standard ability to simply deal tons of damage with 1 Wand/Tool and 1 Grimoire.

Scrolls thoughts: A) Consumables for Grimoire, I.E. Using a Scroll (drag n' drop) over a Grimoire and the Scroll becomes a part of the Grimoire (And perhaps even gives certain "bonuses" to the Grimoire itself. Specializing the Grimoire). I talked about this point a loooooooooooong time ago, maybe 1 or 2 months past I joined this board. Anyways, for instance, putting lots of Fire Scrolls into a Grimoire would make it into a...? Exactly, a Fire Grimoire. Perhaps even giving bonuses to Fire Spells due to the amount of "Fire" in the "Deck"~ A Scroll Transmuted into a Grimoire Deck wouldn't be "consumed". B) One-Time use for any Class or Character, or a couple Charges. The Scroll gets burnt up but it allows your "Fighter" to do a Magical Ability once or twice whilst running into an engage. Of course, it wouldn't be as strong as if a Wizard was doing it, but it serves a purpose. If the 2 or 3 Grimoire's you have are full with Spells (The Grimoire "Deck" has reached it's cap of how many spells you have, and you want to build a Fire Grimoire, then you can waste some Water Scrolls). Basically using those Scrolls you can't use in a Grimoire for some extra utility purposes. Wands thoughts A) Dual-Wielding Wands? :D B) A Wand could be able to empower spells from a Grimoire: "Tip the wand on the page you wish to empower, the wand will then emit a glow as it has now been enhanced. Utter the words (or utter in silence) and point the tip of your wand towards the target location and watch it unfold with greater power" Wizard General Weapon Thoughts A) A thought struck me as I was writing "B)" for Wands. What does different weapons do? B) A free hand, no weapon, and a Grimoire in the Off-Hand. What sort of freedom does that give to the Wizard? 5 Fingers, 5 Magic Missiles? A Fireball that can be channeled in an open palm and be "Readied" and "Thrown" or "Cast" later? (Basically saved for a couple of turns) C) A Wand is kind of a "Wizard's Gun" in my opinion. Point the Wand towards a location, Shoot a Fireball. It's more "Pew pew". D) A Sword? It could have some Wand-like properties but seeing as the main medium in a Sword is some form of metal, it should obstruct massive power and instead perhaps "enchant" the immediate Blade in hand. A Fireball Spell could perhaps instead become a "Fire Sword" Spell. E) A Staff, Two-Handed or can the Wizard hold it like a Cane? (Staff+Grimoire) The Staff should, in my opinion, be the strongest magical weapon. But it would take most time to cast anything and potentially be the Magical Weapon with least spells. F) (This point is also sneaking in some Epic Summoning Quest thoughts) With all this said, would some certain spells require a specific Weapon, Tool, Item, Armor or whatnot to be cast? "Requires a Hammer" or "Requires a Crystal". Will there be ritualistic high-level spells that require Alchemic Ingredients? You need to boil a piece of Glanfathan Root, mash it down, sprinkle some Dust of a Fallen, take a bite of a Bat Wing and channel a Fire Spell to Summon a Dark Lord". So what you would need: Research & Lore ("What tells you about the Summon?") - Book: The Dark Lord Part 1 ("Learn about Glanfathan Root") - Book: The Dark Lord Part 2 ("Learn about the Dust") - Book: The Dark Lord Part 3 ("Learn about the Bat Wing") - Book: The Dark Lord Part 4 ("Learn about the Fire Spell Channel") - Find ingredients - Use in order (Part 1, 2, 3, 4) - Summon Dark Lord ^That's a bit of an in-depth example of what could be done. Something more simple would be: "You need a Free Hand to be able to Cast Ghoul Touch" or "You need a Free Hand to be able to Cast Five-Finger-Fire" or "You need a Wand to be able to Cast Magic-Beam" or whatnot. What medium is best and makes most sense for what sort of spell? What is the traditional way of using a Staff in Project Eternity? Who uses Wands? Can you cast Magic without a Grimoire, and final question, what sort of Power does a Wizard without a Grimoire have?

Hi! This is related to the Development Process and it is more of a question about Beta Testing than a suggestion (although I think it looks like a wise thing to do). This came across my feed somehow, between 2:00-2:30: http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2013/08/21/exploring-the-world-of-dragon-age-inquisition.aspx The question to Obsidian is, does Obsidian plan on doing something similar for Project Eternity with their play/beta/early-access testers? I think personally that it looks healthy for both the developers for the sake of development (getting a better game) and, of course, the players can directly communicate in-game matters with the developers more in-depth about what's going on around them. Not fishing for a beta-access (Though I might buy an Early-Access copy if it ever appears on Steam at whatever stage it is in, Alpha or Beta doesn't matter~ in whatever way I can help ^^), but I just think that getting raw data from the Player decision in-game might help out Obsidian a lot in terms of physical development Members: Thoughts? Obsidian: Possible answer?

That is a most intriguing and cool idea. It'd lend itself very nicely to a bunch of possibly summoner specific quests that somehow involve a pact with a demon which obligates it to assist you. Or perhaps even better, some quests have a summoner-specific outcome. Although the summoner would have to be careful to dismiss it or protect it somehow, for should it die in combat this unique summon would be lost. I can't think of a good story line for such a quest at the moment... but I think it'd have to involve tricking the entity somehow, or defeating it so utterly that it submits to your contract or faces destruction. I can't think of too many creatures that would be willing to give someone the ability to summon them at will and force them to fight to their deaths. Perhaps a quest could go something like this: Strange and terrible rumours have come from Wicking - a relatively minor and unknown land, with a relatively unknown lord called Benedict. Benedict has always been kind and fair to his people, and the atrocities supposedly committed in his lands run contrary to his good reputation. Upon investigation, the player discovers that this lord has been assassinated by a demon who has been impersonating him and doing unspeakable things with the lord's power. Upon defeating this demon in combat, the demon is left to the players mercy. The player can: A) Kill the demon (as any good paladin would do) B) Banish the demon back to its home realm, but with a condition. It must sign a pact with the player which means that the player can summon it forth at will to fight and to die. C) Some other equally brilliant quest resolution that I can't think of at the moment Should the player choose B, this would grant the player a unique spell of summoning. As Osvir describes, this contract is specific to the demon and is invalid once the demon dies and no longer exists. I think it's good because it explains the contract in lore and makes it believable, gives players a new way to solve a quest of this kind, and gives summoners a nifty spell. What do you think? I like it. Perhaps an entirely different path, the "Archaeologist" approach. Searching for Old Scriptures and Poems that could lead to a clue that somehow reveals the Demon's true name. And if you know the name when you encounter the demon you would be its "Master" instantly and wouldn't need to fight it. "Bow to me Demon, for I know thee true name!". And a suggestion: C) Chance resolution: The Demon escapes, in one or two ways. C1: You contract the Demon. But during a power struggle it wins and opens a portal to its realm. C2: It escapes during the first battle. What happens next is for the Player to chase the Demon through the portal and then try to contract and/or kill it in its own realm (Depending on what type of character you play as). Aaaah, I dunno ^^

Is it possible for you to reveal the features of the Journal itself yet? (IE: Can you write the Journal yourself or is it Automatic updates?) Additionally, if the Quest Log is automatic, is it possible to turn it completely manual or could you insert a 100% manual Journal Option? (I want to jot down my own notes, so instead of just clicking the "I Accept this Quest" button and getting an Automatic update, I'd get to choose myself to note it a la example: "I met a man int he alley and he gave me a quest to find his lost cat. He said it might've ran down the sewers"). And if I forget to do it or just plain not do it I could still do the Quest (but the manual/Player Journal could spawn some interesting community stories as well as be interesting to see in an RPG). What I am wondering, in short: - 1, Are you considering a "Blank Journal" Option? (100% Manual/Player reactive writing) - 2, Can I edit the Journal content? Sneaking in 4 questions about Descriptions in general: - 3, Are you considering Spell/Item/Weapon Description Edits? - 4, Are you considering a "Blank Description" Option? (100% Manual/Player reactive writing) 4 = Cast a "???" spell for the first time -> You notice it is a big ball of fire -> Ability to edit the Spell Name "???" into "Fireball" -> Edit the Description "It is a big ball of fire that explodes on impact and deals additional shockwave damage in a small area" This is selfish wishful thinking. Because I would love to jump into the PE world in a "Blank" state. Maybe even call it "Game Journal", and being able to document the experience at first impression value. - 5, Quest or Book Story example: A book that is clearly unfinished, and venturing further into the story of the book where it left off, you could then edit the Book and finish its story. - 6, Puzzle example: Bold, Italic, Underline, a book of mystery. Using the methods of "5", perhaps finding a book of riddles, and being able to edit the text in the book (Making 4 Letters on a page in Bold or other text style could unlock a secret compartment or something)

IC: 1:- "I have questions about the area" PS: Great update! Sounds like a great team is assembling. Looking forward to seeing everything in action :D

cont. @josan motierre I do really like the proposals that: 1, A sort of Sustained Cost would be in effect (I'd like to add in here that... perhaps it could be a rising Sustain Cost over time? See Nr. 3) 2, Summons being both the Weapon and Armor of the Summoner (IF you can build any Class into a Full-Summoner Class) 3, Summons turning on you because your "power" isn't strong enough for whatever reason. A rising Sustain Cost over time could imply a sort of power struggle. But I would like to say that this should only be applicable for Mid to High Tier summons. - Low-Tier Summons should be fairly simple to control I imagine, specially if you're a High-Tier Wizard calling out some Low-Tier minions. - But if you're a Low-Tier Wizard summoning a Mid-Tier Summon it could be struggle. - But, again, if you're a High-Tier Wizard controlling a Mid-Tier minion it should, again, be fairly simple. I also want to add and clarify that my suggestion that Summons would be "Permanent" is not quite what I meant. I meant that if you do not Unsummon them and keep them in battle (Only relevant for Unique/Legendary/Epic High-Tier Summons) they can potentially die and can't be summoned again. It is not meant to apply for ALL summons (of course). If there are millions and millions of Imps in the "Summonable Realm of Summons", then they never "run out".. so to speak. If there's 100'000 Devil Hounds, then that too should translate to an Infinite amount of summons. But if there's only 1 Kragashlamanakahakadakk Summoning Spell (Kragashlamanahak... kak.. lak...hakadakk????? **** it) Demon Overlord in the Realm of Summons (or wherever these things come from), then there should only be 1 available. Summoning that 1 Single Demon that exists in the realm of PE and then if that 1 Single Demon dies, then that's it, you wouldn't be able to summon 1 more because you only had 1 contract with that 1 Single Demon. And when it's dead it is dead. And if there is only 1 Single Demon like this, I imagine that it should at least be quite powerful, which could even further make it more difficult to: A, Contract in the first place B, Maintain/Sustain during battle The sole reason why I am suggesting this is because that could make 1 or 2 Summons "extraordinaire" in PE. It could make them matter lots, and that in itself makes it more interesting (imo). As for balancing it, well, long "cooldown"? (Once an In-Game Week type of summoning procedure? Limited In-Game Ingredients/Components making it so you can only summon it three, four times at most a full game?) As for the examples and concepts above, might not be something to follow to heart but I am merely throwing out "sketches" of a much larger idea. If I summon Kragash.... whatever I typed up there^... I don't want an opposing Enemy AI be able to Summon it as well. Which takes me to the finale of this post: The Enemy team has a Summoner on their side. How can they mess with your Summons? How can you mess with theirs? Does Obsidian have enough resources to build upon a large pool of Summons and Summoning Mechanics? (Because in my head it starts to sound like its own entire Class that could fit well into Expansion content, because I imagine how freaking badass a fully developed "original" Summoner Class could be, and because Klarth is one of my favorite characters of all time because of his abilities... and of course because of his personality too but the concept of his "Summoning" is pretty neat and cool imo... ruuun ooon senteneeence/paragraph!! )

I'm not familiar with X-Com or Final Fantasy, so I can't comment on your other points. I like the naming summons thing, and the notion that a summon would be able to be permanent thing, but then you have the whole balancing drama you need to think about as well. The summon couldn't be as powerful and useful as another companion, unless it occupied a "Party slot". That would be interesting, but then the player would have to forgo any conversational dialogue. I can't imagine a story and conversation tree being feasible for a summon that is essentially a fully fledged companion. I doubt Obsidian has the time or the desire to do that. Therefore, the player is losing a bit of story line there. If it was as capable as a companion, but had no dialogue, then that is very easy. The penalty for using it is that is serves exactly has a companion - therefore, you're down a party member as long as it's around. It could be preferable, actually. Golems are nice and quiet, and don't backchat. But... Assuming it didn't occupy a party slot, then it would need to be balanced some other way. There are a few methods for this that are in discussion currently: It would be weaker than a companion and would have a penalty upon the summoner for using it (eg. reserved mana, time limit/duration [heaven forbid this one!], or some other means). Or, as I and Lephy prefer, the summoner himself is actually as weak and helpless thing that needs his minions around just to survive or deal damage. They are his weapons and armour, literally. Depending on its power, it could have a very real chance of turning around and killing you itself (as Mr. Magniloquent advocates) What I am proposing is merely the capability to name your "Summon Monster III". Instead off summoning some random critters you could instead have 3 pre-determined weak/medium critters that you've named. The capabilities of the summons would be exactly the same as before (they don't get stronger or weaker just because you put a name on it), the difference would be "aesthetics" or "roleplaying" value. Let's take this example: Spell Name: "Summon Two Imps" OR "Summon Humpti & Dumpti" Mechanically the Spell would do the exact same thing that it did before. So, in essence, the Spell Effect would not do anything except just having a different name. However, if Humpti or Dumpti would die in battle (because they weren't unsummoned or whatnot in time), they die and you get to summon a new (although exactly the same) Imp that you can rename. The suggestion of point Nr. 1 is 100% roleplaying value. Though, it would be nice to get some sort of "Summons Hall of Fame" in the description of the spell, somehow. If Humpti dies, it could perhaps be logged in the description of the Spell, "Humpti was killed by a Fire Elemental" (Simplistic), but I admit that might give Obsidian some minor aches in terms of coding that specific [Description Edit] based on [Target Creature] and [Target Summon] (I think it is a fairly simple code sequence, it would still take some time to create, bugtest and such... optimistically I guess on an hour or two~).

This is my fear, too. It could be avoided by not giving enemies any resistances until you get access to magical weapons, but eeehh.We need more information about P:E combat mechanics to make even the vaguest speculations. Simple. Run away and adjust. OR! Engage -> Lose a party member -> Realize it was too much for you -> Run away -> Prepare -> Kick some ass ^That's Hardcore Ironman thoughts. For some more casual thoughts: Save game -> Run into enemies -> Die -> Load -> Meta-Prepare

There is only one thing I would want from Summoning... actually 3 things. 1. Name your summons. This way they get more personal and gets roleplaying value rather than a "combat" asset. It becomes an extra companion instead of a Magical Spell. 2a. If they die they die. X-Com style. Different Tiers are contracted differently (Low-Mid-High). 3. Final Fantasy 8. Fight some higher tier summons and tame them/bind them or whatnot. Learning a Demon's true name for instance. 2b. - Low-Tier Summons = Easy to get more contracts to summon more (Infinite amount) - Mid-Tier Summons = Virtually Unlimited. Some Low-Tier Summons could perhaps even upgrade into Mid-Tier Summons if they can stay alive for long enough in the party? (And/Or as the Wizard levels up, Low-Tier Summons simply come out as Mid-Tier). - High-Tier Summons = Demons which you've learned true names and other unique/epic/legendary Summons you've found = Permanent Death if they die. Limited Stock.

It definitely looks graphically impressing. I am excited but something about the camera control (3rd person view... *sigh*) just doesn't sit right with me when it comes to a party managing game. To be honest, DA:I would probably benefit much more from just going to Mass Effect route. Control Shepard and order your party members around from that point of view. Controlling a party of characters from a 3rd person perspective just feels weird in my opinion. In this sense, Mass Effect does the "Control 1 Character and order 2 characters around" management both fun and mechanically functional. I hope they will consider & implement a top-down camera control like DA:O still. I am certain it will get more people on-board to buy and play the game. Why? Because it allows the individual Player to play by their own preference, and seeing the comments section of that gameinformer link... - [New Fans] seem to enjoy the close-combat action responsiveness of DA2. 3rd Person perspective and Casual/Normal Difficulty (Which in turn means that New Fans likes more of a Mass Effect approach. Little "down-time" in actual gameplay, God of War-ish/Dark Souls-ish). - [Old Fans] seem to enjoy the more tactical, slower paced DAO. Top-down perspective and Hard/Nightmare Difficulty (Which in turn means that Old Fans likes the more Baldur's Gate/Chess-like approach. More time to think, calculate, positioning and preparation in actual gameplay). So, by simply adding a good enough "Hard/Nightmare" difficulty to DA:I and adding a Mobile Top-Down RTS-like Camera (Map Scrolling; Not being locked to a fixed position), Bioware could cater to both groups. A, Those who like to play the 3rd Person Action Game B, Those who like to play the Top-Down Chess-like Game However and again, this can only be achieved if BioWare includes the possibility for a Top-Down Camera (like DA:O) and a good hard difficulty. If Bioware would successfully do this I believe DA:I would gain more success and be a way more fun experience. Looking at the demonstration video as it is though, it looks to be mostly a polished DA2-system combined with some elements from Dark Souls/Mass Effect.

Simple. P:E has 12 levels. To get enough experience to hit level 13 you have to kill all NPC's, all Mobs, do all quests in the game that you can do. Pretty much make the world empty of everything except the last boss. Done To be able to hit Level 13, above the presented Level cap, there needs to be enough content in the game to allow you to do so. If you are an OCD person who does everything in the game to get as much experience as possible, then you hit Level 12. What's next? How do you attain more experience? Content. That would mean Obsidian would have to spend more resources. Time+Money in other words. This is important because, if there is no more physical experience to gain when you get level 12 (Because you know, you've done everything there is to do). How do you expect to gain more when there is no more? In that way, it would be impossible to get to Level 13. "Hey I did all the 10 quests and stuff and I am level 12 now. Why can't I get to level 13?" is what I think this thread sounds like to be honest. My answer is "Because you bloody ate the whole damn cake. There's nothing left of it". EDIT: However, if I am allowed to get to Level 12 and there is still content left in the game, then I might question it a little bit if I can't get to level 13-14 or if it "hard caps" on me a la "No more for you". Stun got it right imo btw, give +1 damage and maybe some Health/Stamina or something. Nothing really fancy but just a little bit "more" of some basic statistics and/or dice roll initiatives or something. Making the characters slightly stronger but not overly too strong.

Absolutely, but it is also important to note that if the Enemy AI will have any type of "Vision Cone" where they see, if they are facing the door directly it is going to be difficult to sneak by mechanically, unless it is one of those rooms where you just "can't" sneak by. Oh and I am inserting speculation that such an element will be present in this scene. It looks like a Dialogue will start with the Male and Female Cult/Skaen/"Robe-guys-around-the-Animat-Soul-thing" up front when you enter the room. This is what I imagine and speculate when I look at the screenshot: 1. You are in front of the door, you have 4-5 triggers. - A: Click the door -> Open the door (Door opens) - B: [Thievery] equivalent on the door -> Open the door slightly and take a peek (Door is still closed) - C: Attack the door -> Kick the door open (Same as A) - D: Trap the door (Pick Trap -> Click Door) (Only 1 Door Opening Animation, just noting that I am suggesting something simple) A1: Simple Approach - Dialogue Pause/Cutscene (As seen in the IE games) - Choices (A2) A2: - Talk to the guys inside (They turn around) - Listen to the guys inside (Gather information) - Close the door and turn around (They look creepy, stay away/better go back to camp and prepare) - Use Special Ability/Dialogue Ability/Perk/Trait or something. Example: The Cipher manipulates the Animat Factory to do something~ B1: Stealth Approach - Listen, Look, Limited Vision through Fog of War in the room (more "keyhole = beam-like")* - Distract/Whistle/Yell/Trick/Knock - Dialogue Pause/Cutscene (As seen in the IE games) - Conversation through the door "Hey is there anyone in there" "Yes... who is it?" etc. etc. C1: Aggressive Approach - Kick the door open (Bash) and engage in battle directly, or a very short Dialogue Pause a la "Wha....? To arms!!!" from the guys inside. - Makes most noise. The reason why I look at the picture like this is because it looks like a typical Dialogue Scene has been set up in the room when you enter it. I'm simply trying to expand on possibilities- if this would have been an old-school Text-Only cRPG, this screenshot would've said something like: "You are in front of a door. What do you want to do?" That's how I am looking at it ^^ Post 2-in-1 I also noticed another thing, a suggestion (if Obsidian hasn't already thought of it), there is a piece of cloth hanging on the wall behind the Brown/Leather Armored Party Character (Aumaua?). Could it possibly lead to a secret path? It caught my eye and it looks almost like there could be a hole behind it, and no it's not the shadows from the cloth itself, but if you look on the right side of it, it looks like a stone arch... or is it simply cracks in the wall? * I came up with a spell. "See Through Doors", but perhaps a better name should be required. Make doors transparent for the eyes of the Wizard. It might sound OP, but I think it could be a cool utilitarian ability.

I don't feel entitled or anything but I wish to say as a member who's been here almost since the Kickstarter project began, this community has faith := Many of the on-going discussions I've been a part of has been great stuff for inspiration, motivation, innovation, discussions, analysis, agreements and disagreements of various system ideas, suggestions, propositions and so on and so forth. Many say "Nay!" to my ideas as an example, but may say "Yay!" to another forum member's ideas. The negativity we see I believe isn't necessarily directed at PE but more or less towards mine, yours, some other guy or girls thoughts of what should be or not be in PE. "I want this!" says one, and the other answers "Are you kidding me?". See where the negativity is? Though, I haven't read much around on the forums lately, but I remember this forum being very open-minded and friendly I think people just want PE to be the best it can be, granted the resources that Obsidian has. And to tip this post off: Passion is in many ways strong, it has many colors and many forms. Some rage, some spit, some love, some hate etc. but fundamentally I believe all want the same thing: A good RPG. And as far as I am concerned and what I know of the project, PE looks to form into just that. Culturally it's a neat little phenomena already in my book, and it has lots of history already as a very successful Kickstarter project (as to date), which will make it even more interesting for years to come. Possibly even looking back 10-20 or even 30-40 years from now and talk about this project as... something ^^ People wouldn't be posting if they didn't have a little "faith". For what it's worth, that's what I think Have a good day, and don't forget hugs