Osvir

First: Could I get a bit of a recap on the "core" of the discussion? I don't care much for "Lephys and Stun are arguing" but what is the underlying sentiment and idea? The "broad" picture basically. A summary would be nice (for those who lurk these forums as well I believe, new and old members who haven't followed the thread, 11 pages is quite a lot). Second, a bit of a recap of what I said and a point I want to make come across: The only thing Josh said was "I don't like Save-or-Die effects". That does not mean that there are Death Spells that cause instant death. What it means is that there will be no instant death effects that you can't defend against. In other words, PE will most likely have a ton of "Die Die Die!-Effects" and "Die Die Die!-Tactics" for both the AI and the Player alike. So why should Death Spells be excluded? Some things I want to emphasize as well if Death Spells (that cause "Death-Effect") are in PE: 1. Protect Against "Death-Effect" Spells that you can cast before the Death Spell has been cast in-combat. A Level 1 Protect Spell could make a 100% Sure Hit turn into a 75% Hit (See #4). 2. Priority Targeting & "Color" Coding. Display a "warning" text in some way that the Player knows that "Incoming Death-Effect". Examples: - Aloth says "The enemy is channeling a powerful spell!" in the Dialogue tab. - It says in the Combat log: "Enemy Wizard is channeling/readying Death Spell" - Enemy gets a specific type of "aura" or "color" when channeling a Death Spell. Giving the Player a clear notion that the Enemy is specifically readying a Death Spell. ^A good example (Top of my head): Warframe There are these pesky little flying robots in Warframe that does not attack, but they shield everything around them. So if you are facing 10 enemies and a Shield Robot, you have to target the robot first or it will replenish all the shields over and over again on every single enemy. Death Spells should have this if they are in PE. Scripting the AI to target the Player too. 3. Stuns, Grapples, Taunts (Mocking) or whatever. Channeling or readying a Death Spell should take a ton of concentration but first and foremost: Time. Instantaneously casting a Death Spell should not be viable in any way (not even with Buffs or a high enough level). Heck, perhaps even regular damage could interrupt a Death Spell (Shooting an arrow at the Wizard could perhaps negate the Death Spell briefly before the Enemy* can start readying it again). 4. A Death Spell should require a Full on Direct Hit (100% Hit). A 25%, 50%, 75% hit would not cause "Death-Effect" and simply "tickle". Pokeball mechanics boosting chances to get a 100% hit (Poisoning and/or general Weakening of the Enemy). Same thing for the AI, if they Poison you, they get better chances to deal "Death" to you. With all of the above said and done for balance-sake: A) You engage in a fight. B) Enemy begins to ready a Death Spell. C) You notice this by the use of #2. D) You cast a spell to protect yourself before the Death Spell is cast. Alternatively you move into range and interrupt the Spell. - Not "Save-or-Die" but "React-or-Die". *Enemy could also mean Player. I want to put emphasis on that everything that the AI can do the Player should be able to do and vice versa. If the AI can cast Death Spells, then the Player should be able to cast Death Spells. If the Player can defend themselves against Death Spells, then the AI should be able to cast Death Spells. Final Note: Regardless I hope that Death Spells aren't common in the either the Lore of PE or in the actual Gameplay of PE. I would like to see some of them, perhaps 2 or 3 existent in the game, so building Scripts and Triggers for them should be more simple as well (because they would be such a minor part of the game). A Death Spell is like an "Ultimate" in my opinion. League of Legends and DotA reference here: Most "Ultimates" in those games can be avoided. For instance, Cho'Gath can't eat you if you're out of range. Darius can't dunk you if you are out of range and Lux can not hit you if you dodge hers etc. etc. Death Spells could be purely Skill Shots as well. Though then it gets complicated for the AI I would believe, and much easier to dodge and read as a Player.

Artificial Difficulty isn't quite what I wanted to put emphasis on with that video, but the fact that if you play with awareness and using skill+tools provided to you (rules), you can avoid all traps, beat all enemies and all bosses in Demon Dark Souls. You could, in theory, finish Demon Dark Souls without dying once. The beginning of the video is what I wanted to put emphasis on really, where he plays 2 different "extremes". The one on the left who treads more carefully and soaks his environment in and reflects it (paying attention/having awareness) and thus avoids dangers, whilst the other simply goes gung-ho all in YOLO style and consequentially runs into danger. Player #1 is being rewarded for playing with awareness and knowledge of the game's rules. "It is my fault, I have to get better"-mentality. Player #2 is being punished for ignoring the rules. And, in this extreme (yet very common) example, blames the game/developers. "It is your fault, fix it in a patch!"-mentality. I like Player #1's attitude and I obviously like this form of difficulty. I grow as a person overcoming difficulties like that. I'd actually like to call it the "Parenting Difficulty". You get a firm "No!" if you fail in the form of "You died", and if you succeed you are rewarded with a continuation of the bedtime story. He also brings up some pretty good points, in my opinion, throughout the entire video. But I think that's more of a mindset as a Player rather than a "difficulty" per say. EDIT: P.S. I haven't played Dark Souls, I did play a lot of Demon Souls though. Mostly done video watching & reading on Dark Souls (Lore, Mechanics, Articles etc. etc.).

I don't really see the connection here The whole point of a multi-class is to have a character that is able to handle different situations, in my opinion. What do you do if you play a Solo-Fighter and you encounter an enemy that is immune to physical attacks? However, I don't think or believe that would be a problem for a PE Solo-Fighter. I hope every class has some sort of ability to use some sort of trademark magic. The Fighter's magic library might just not be as large or even near potent as a Wizard's magic library and potent (IF the system works in any way like this). Will the tools be available for my character to handle different situations? I believe/hope there will be (that's just speculation). In that sense, overcoming the AI shouldn't be too hard in theory, if one abides to the rules and takes logical tactical & strategic decision-making into account.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oYLhAZvjvU&feature=c4-overview-vl&list=PLWLedd0Zw3c7iIIMT0WQwEVeztYgS4A_t EDIT: Dark Souls and Artificial Difficulty. Great video in my opinion. EDIT EDIT: Additionally: Extria Credits Depth vs Complexity

I'm definitely going to try soloing a bit on the harder difficulties for laughs and "just-because-challenge"/"challenge accepted" but I don't expect it to be easy or even doable (or designed with it in mind). I imagine that mobs can be conquered but bosses might get very difficult unless Obsidian is thinking of implementing some sort of GW2 scaling mechanic (more party members = tougher fights). Thinking about it more, that could even work psuedo-lore-soul... ish. The more souls that gather up in one spot, the more "volume" of souls there would be? If all of their intents are the same (e.g. to do battle), would that somehow change the balance of the "force"? Imagine 1 against 1 in a forest dueling honorably against each other with no eyes watching but their own. 2 bodies with 2 souls (and nature and whatnot~ but that's not the point). Now take 6 against 1 and there's suddenly 7 bodies with 7 souls. Could something cause a fight to be "fiercer" when there is more souls present than when there is less? Some sort of "Soul Balance Mechanic" /End of rambles "Where most gather, there always is 'commotion'. The heart of the largest city stirs like a boiling pot, left right up and down and around around. In the forests of nature there is songs and chirps from all cretin within; In some ways beautiful melodies, in others ways 'noise' and 'unrest'. Yes, indeed, only in One's own heart and in One's own equality will One find the most rest." - Written by: A suddenly surprising rush of inspiration. What I wanted to say with this little tidbit is, where "more" gathers, "more" happens. In that sense, would "more" Power gather when you are adventuring? Let's take a Bandit Lord for instance, if you stomp into his camp with a full party of 6, would that cause a larger reaction from the entire camp (and thus triggering a "Bandit Camp vs Party of 6"-Fight) than, let's say, a single (Solo) Fighter appearing in the camp and specifically challenging the Bandit Lord? - Party of 6 enters camp: Camp fight - Party of 1 enters camp: 1v1 fight Aaaand EDIT: Some introspection/reflection, would such a GW2-like-ish Multiplayer scaling translate well to a Singleplayer RP game? Maybe. The real question, I think is, how easy would it be to implement and how could you do it as simple as possible? Simplest form I can think of: - Party of 6 enters camp: Spawn more enemies (Triggered by "X Party members?"). Let's say 6 underlings+Boss for simplicity's sake. - Party of 1 enters camp: Spawn less enemies and/or directly fight Boss. Let's say 1 underling+Boss for simplicity's sake. In fact, the only thing I can think of being the most problematic when it comes to "Solo"-plays are balancing Boss fights "correctly". So, again, for simplicity's sake the only areas that would "require" some sort of "Solo-Scaling" would be Boss triggered fights and/or areas.

5 districts definitely. However, I see 2 more that could potentially be districts as well. 1 greenlands/farmlands area to the north-east of the city. City outskirts basically. 1 area to the north-west under a cloud that looks like a small area (the cloud and shadow makes it look like a "slummy" area or some sort of Thief Guild area ^^ but that's because of the cloud shadow I would believe). It might also be part of the 2nd Layer district next (left) to the "City center". Summary: 5-7 districts?

There were quite some lore bits in there and some minor explanation of the world/souls. To me it felt as if Chris was hinting a bit companion progression/direction/inspiration with Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy VI (U.S = Final Fantasy III). In essence: Taking control of your companion characters and exploring side-quests with them (and their stories) without your main character and in many ways exploring your companion's stories further. Though, that's merely speculation. Similar speculation goes with the emphasis I thought Chris put on Final Fantasy VI's narration choice mid-game (the "end" of the world, Kefka reshapes the world)... God Bomb, anyone?

There was quite a lot of new information, given in small doses but it tells a lot about the game itself though. I'm excited

This. Opinion: I am a firm believer that Obsidian should be allowed to work at their own pace with the game without having to feel rushed. If they feel they can finish it by April 2014, fine, but if they decide that they want to polish it further and/or work on it some more (a.k.a. can't finish it by April 2014) then I wouldn't mind it much from a consumer standpoint if it was released in May, June or even July~ I'd prefer to have a finished product rather than a rushed product. Thoughts/Ideas that may or may not contradict the above Opinion (Very much an "IF scenario"): What about an episodic type of release? Let's say Obsidian can't finish the game entirely by April 2014, they've got all plans all concepts for the last areas on paper, last levels and last stuff to put into the game but they need 1 or 2 more months to actually develop it (model the areas, balance, quests, story progression etc. etc. spawn points, locations or whatnot, triggers you get the deal I believe). Should they release 70% of the content in April 2014 and then release 30% of the last content periodically over the course of the following months like Telltale's game "The Walking Dead"?

@Pipyui: I like the concept and the sentiment. I believe it would be more immersive if the UI reacted to the environment.

Yes! In some instances (or singular instance) I would love to battle with words rather than with swords. That doesn't rhyme, but it should! Regardless, I had this odd thought/idea that sprung to mind seeing this pictures. Idea: An illusion. A puzzle, where you have control of your 6 party members, walk on top of a picture with choices and some background art. The choices themselves you choose heckle the player, as the villain has trapped him/her in this "realm" or whatnot. Perhaps would fit better in a game like Torment but for some reason I envision it being an awesome (and frustrating) encounter.

Read some comments, haven't voted, but I thought of this for some reason (I think it's cinematic but at the same time I don't know). Regardless, I think it's out of the scope but I would love for it have an effect. Maybe in a 3rd or 4th installment http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ivwgE_t8a5s#t=62s EDIT: 1:39 is where the shielding begins. @Fireball spell, point of impact and then explosion outwards. But yeah it gets complicated. Shouldn't lightning strikes and cloud-likes target those in most metal? Something I asked up a while ago that I think fits into this thread: "Paint your AoE?" - Grease Spell - TnT barrel - Enemies next to barrel - Paint AoE to the barrel - Light the fuse! - Boom

I haven't followed this story so I don't know too much about it as a whole. I think a lot of it is misunderstanding, some of the riots at least. In essence: We've got some real numbskulls in our urban areas. That's not judgemental, I just think they are acting dumb and having a different rational perspective. Take this article for instance, written by a Journalist at our Swedish Television (SVT = SVensk Television), translation is courtesy of Google Translate: http://hotlamotte.com/2013/05/24/aftonbladet-och-expressen-betalar-oss-for-att-branna-bilar-i-husby/ *7'000 crowns = about 1'050 USD Basically, Aftonbladet and Expressen are indirectly contributing to the continuing violence and commotion. They might not mean for it but I believe some scenarios can easily be described such as this: Scenario 1: Envy Kid 1: "Lucky! I got 7000 crowns for capturing this on video!" <- not a criminal but a matter of "at the right place at the right time" Kid 2: "Whaaat??" *Goes and burns cars to get some money* Scenario 2: Aftonbladet & Expressen actually does pay for video and photographs Kid 1: "Hey! We can make money if we burn down cars!" Kid 2: "Yeaaah!" In no way do I believe that media directly goes to the kids and tell them "Go and burn down some cars and we'll pay you" but the kids are aware that they will get paid if they get good photographs, and what is the best way to get good photographs? Become Peter Parker, right? Money rules. I believe that some people believe that "let's burn down some cars!" is an exploit and a loophole rather than a crime, because of the fact that they can make money out of it. And who makes most money out of it? Media. Honestly, I don't think they care much except "Yaaay! We got a top story here! Who cares if the kids think they can burn down cars and get paid! They are burning down cars and we get a story that sells like butter! Yaay!".

I think it sounds interesting but at the same time I don't. It sounds like it automates gameplay and removes tactical decision making, which I don't like. What I do like about it is some sort of "Group Cast" feature that your idea seems to flirt with. Gameplay-wise I could see it being like "lending ones Soul" to another. Some thoughts: Example 1: Magic Missile w/ Fighter - Wizard is level 3, Magic Missile has Level 3 potentiality. - Fighter is also level 3. - Wizard initiates "Group Cast", Fighter can "lend" some of his Soul to the casting by paying/sacrificing Stamina or whatnot. Gives 1/3 of his Level to the Group Cast. - Magic Missile gets Level 4 potentiality. Fighter is weakened. Example 2: Magic Missile w/ Wizard - 2 Wizards, both are Level 3. - 1 Wizard initiates "Group Cast", the other Wizard can "lend" his Soul to the casting (Gives 1/1 of his Level to the Group Cast). - Magic Missile gets Level 6 potentiality. The other Wizard is weakened. Example 3: Whirlwind Attack - 4 Characters. 1 Character has Whirlwind Attack (The others does not necessarily have to have it) - 3 Characters can "lend" Soul to 1 Character using it (sacrificing/paying a cost/resource) - The 1 Character does a more powerful Whirlwind Attack, but 3 characters are now weakened. This way, you get a more powerful version of the original technique, but you would also weaken your team (those who joined in the Group Cast) for a duration. Makes it more tactical, and you'd save time against some fodder/filler mobs. In no way would I like to see a feature like this "crush dragons in seconds" (or any other strong mob/boss for that matter), unless (maybe) on Casual or Easy Difficulty.

Sorry.... I couldn't help it.... xD

I don't mind Instant Death Spells to be honest if done right. In the IE Games: Imo, not done right - Cast Instant Death Spell - Enemy dies (or you, depending who is casting them) - Nothing What I'd like to see: [strength or Power Level] / (Weakness or Consequence or Penalties) - [Channel Death Spell Power] / (For 30-60 seconds) - [Cast Death Spell] / (Consequence) - [Death Effect] / (Post-Consequence) Consequence = Sacrifice important components or ingredients, sacrifice reputation Post-Consequence = Soul-Sickness, Penalties, Narrative Effect It could even have effects long term in the game, and a Wizard who would have welcomed you with a smile now smells the corruption in you as he can sense the foul forces you have called in the past. Death Spell to me = Huge impact on the narrative Death Spell to me = Not something trivial but something that strips life force itself, strips the soul essence. A Death Spell does not cut flesh or bone, it cuts the soul. You might say that a sword to the face or a stab through the heart creates the same effect (or a Fireball spell that scorches someone to ashes), but to me it doesn't in a fantasy fictional world, a Death Spell by itself is something Forbidden and Banished. Something that is loathed and in a world where Mortality is a Big Business without any resurrection spells and Necromancy is mysterious/alienated I sense that a rare unique Death Spell could in fact be something that enriches the story as a whole. Something that could be used as a Narrative tool or something that the Player could get their hands on at a great cost. Paragraph Broken down: - P:E has "Mortality is a Big Business". - Necromancy. - No Resurrection Spells. - My opinion: Death Spell (Singular) could enrich the narrative and have impact if rare & unique and comes at a great cost to use. Tactically: In a fight or encounter wherein you face someone with the Death Spell the encounter itself could be built around the protection of the caster (because he has to channel the spell for a while to cast it, ritualistic Death Spell in a sense) and it becomes a tactically engaging fight that you have to figure out. Yes, very much Save-or-Die if you don't manage to defeat it on the first try, but if you are capable of reading the game well at this point where it appears you would be able to defeat it. It would be a question of "Get to the guy who is channeling the Death Spell, interrupt him before he casts it". A timed event encounter in other words, still with a risk of missing or being resisted. So let's take that into a calculation: Scenario where Player resists the spell: - Enemy channels Death Spell for 30-60 seconds. - You fail to get to the Enemy in time and enemy casts Death Spell - You resist it (50/50 gamble) - He gets penalties/soul sickness or whatnot and can't cast it again until 30-60 seconds - Begins to channel it again - You manage to interrupt it Scenario where Player interrupts the spell: - Enemy channels Death Spell for 30-60 seconds - You defeat all the defenses and get to the enemy and interrupts the spell EDIT: In other words, a Death Spell in an environment such as P:E could be very interesting in my opinion (added with the components that are already in the game), but it would have to be very specific to the point where it becomes an encounter rather than an automatic ability you learn.

Exactly. We have Korgan, Mr. S and Charname (fighter) in our group and we want to crush a dragon in seconds? Easy peasy: in the middle of battle, we select all of them and pick whatever shared ability they have, for example, Whirlwind Attack. Well, of course we can select it one by one, but eventually it could be really tedious. At first I thought this idea sounded pretty cool, but then I read this comment and wondered if this produces intelligent and tactical gameplay or if it produces hand-holding almost-automated "always win" situations. In essence: It sounds like a Casual Difficulty request (I'm a biased individual; Hardcore difficulty). The point: If the ability is strong enough to remove the tactical play from a tactical game then it either does not belong or it needs polish so that it becomes tactical. I don't shun the idea though, I think it's interesting. This sounds like a typical: "Do I use this ability and suffer some risky consequences or do I play safe?"-Ability. If it is as strong as you depict in your post I believe it should come at some sort of disadvantage.

Thinking a bit more about it, I don't really care much how the UI is positioned. It can be X shaped for all I care. Looking at what has been presented I've shuddered a little bit, I've hummed a little bit, nodded a little bit and raised eyebrows a little bit. Some of the suggestions look great, some of them don't. It is mostly related to the aesthetic, because for me personally it doesn't matter if there's big portraits, small portraits, left or right chat, vertical or horizontal. I just want it to be pretty and relate well to the game experience. I'm more for the aesthetic bits. If it's complex- or simplistic functionality-wise does not matter either, because I'll figure it out. Many seem to complain about NWN2 having a "not-so-pretty" UI, but no one is complaining about the functionality of it. So I think others probably relate. So on the aesthetic bit, it would be cool if the UI had different art depending on where you are in the world (I.E: Dungeon, City, Outdoors. Those 3 would be the general fundamental ones but there's also Temple, Cave, Forest, Mountain, Graveyard/Corrupted etc. etc.). I think the best way to explain it would be "Skins". The buttons would be in the same place but the "UI Skin" would be different. Aah, a man can dream this is more of a visionary rather than a suggestion. Something I think could look cool. Heck, it would be cool if the UI shifted depending on your character development. The darker, more morally evil, character gets to see his UI Skin shift and become corrupted and blighted, cracks begin to appear in it. The more Light-headed Paladin gets angels instead of the neutral looking statues etc. etc. WarCraft 3 does this very well with the different races, I don't know how much resources Obsidian have to spend on it though but, again, it would be pretty cool (and more immersive I believe). WarCraft 3 UI Art Undead: Night Elf: Human: Orc:

I can't really give you an answer on that but I relate to your post a little bit, that's kind of my first impression as well "It looks weird!". Looking at it in photoshop and going in closer in on it I feel it is very pretty and has potential to do what it is intended to do, provide party intelligence. Artistically it is very wooden, with some stone, I feel they could work more with that concept. Spell icons could have animation or be runic and integrated into the UI so that they blend very nicely together. The icons are not helping as they are now. They make me relate to the older games and the older games are outdated by themselves, there's definitely relevance in the psychology of that. To be honest, due to the icons I actually thought that it was one of the IE UI's that had been copy-pasted onto the screenshot until I zoomed in on it and read some comments to realize that in fact, it was not. ICONS NEEDS TO BE UPDATED <- there you go, all caps, bold and size 18 Another thing to take into consideration is that we've been seeing the screenshot without an UI for a very long time now, and my first impression of the UI together with the screenshot is that it makes it look squeezed together. Even when we saw the UI for the very first time, the UI mockups we saw back then looked weird. I believe there is relevance there as well to my own reaction. Relate or do not relate, up to you. EDIT: Stone carving (Google Search link) Some concepts, general idea of what I'm talking about with icons: Wood burn carving (Google Search link) Some concepts: This one gets to stand out because I like it (named "Peace in Many Languages")

* User Interface Got surprised. First impression was "The game screen feels squeezed" added with "That's IE game icons", most likely because I was used to the full picture without a UI. Now that I've looked at it with a looking glass and I've gotten used to it, it looks great. Albeit I admit, I would love to see some unique icons for the Options, Inventory, Spells, Attack, Guard, etc.etc. you know what I'm talking about. The main problem I have with it, or issue, is with the character portrait space. It looks great, but the shading seems to be a little bit off in tidbits of places. I tried using the "Burn Tool" (used to make things darker in photoshop) next to he Mana/Health bars on the portrait space. Portraits And personally I feel it makes the portrait feel like they are in place behind the pillars as it seems they should be. The issue I have with the original one is that it's weird on the eyes. It feels like the portrait space is jutting outwards yet it looks as if they are supposed to be behind the pillars on the sides (I focus my eyes on the pillars and it looks like the portraits are behind, but when I focus my eyes on the portraits it looks like they are in front of the pillars, ye, my eyes are weird). It might be so simply explained that Aloth and the Orlan on the right-hand side in the tabbed version of the UI weren't cut-pasted correctly as well, as they seem to overlap the borders between each portrait space. http://media.obsidian.net/eternity/media/updates/0054/pe-hud-wip.1280.jpg Compare (Aloth & Orlan) Health/Mana: I really like the coloring and shading up close, there's depth up close, but when I zoom out it looks rather flat and non-dimensional (2D). I would like to see it more "glass"-like or "crystal"-like if possible. Mostly because I think it would look cool, then as health and mana taps perhaps some sort of "transparent" glass effect, Diablo 2 esque but without the animation. Dialogue/Combat: ggwp. Furthermore: When I'm in the Combat tab and someone is saying something, could the Dialogue tab "flash" or "highlight" somehow? (Note: Not blink. Blinking is annoying and alerting, unless done very slowly with maybe 3-4 second intervals). Options Space: I like it, but as I said above, it's the IE icons and I'd like to see something new that relates. Artistically, it looks like a form of wooden carvings could work very well. Option icons could look like they have been carved into the UI. It also looks like a Left button and a Right button (the empty spaces in the middle of the Options section). In essence: The space in-between the Journal and the Options buttons looks like it could be a "Right Button". I am wondering if something could be used with that, could you cycle through another "hidden" section of the UI by clicking it? Example: First Section: - Character - Journal - Skills - Inventory - etc.etc. Right-Click (Causes a slide animation or something) Slides into Installation/Second Section: - Video - Sound - Gameplay Third section? Fourth section?

Now imagine if Arcanum wouldn't have that sort of individual inventory slots or "imaginary individual backpacks". Would the items in question, that Nonek brings up, hold the same significance to each of the characters? Again, this time using the reference in Nonek's post. Individual Pack: Version 1 Shared Pack: Version 2 Furthermore, I am curious about the size of the Shared Pack. Is it a set amount? (I.E. 36 slots) or is it something that "widens" depending on how many party members I have? (1 character = 6 slots, 2 characters = 12 slots etc. etc. increment of 6) The reason to why I am asking is. Can 1 character carry 36 items in a Shared Pack, or would it be make more sense if it was an increment? (Shared Pack grows the more characters you have). Each 6 slots that you get in the Shared Pack could be "color coded" somehow. So basically you would be getting [Version 2] as seen above, but it could be individualized at the same time. Hybrid Pack: Version 3; Concept With 1 more character, you'd get 6 more slots etc. etc. It's really silly ideas that doesn't add much in terms of gameplay, but it does add lots in terms of roleplay imo.

Shared Stash, perfectly fine with that. Shared Pack? Well, I dunno. One part of me says "Why not?". It makes coding (probably) as effective as possible (I am just guessing). You'd be able to easily switch Pack gear and Stash gear around-still guessing. But is it fun? I kind of like the micro-managing myself. Not to mention the personality it adds to the character. I threw all the scrolls onto Dynaheir for a reason, some of them I gave to Imoen. I took all the gems with the "Said to provide luck" in the description on my main character. Boo being in Minsc's inventory slot adds character as well. Organizing the gear between the characters, putting some specific stuff on a specific character for a specific reason (The Barbarian gets all the excess metal armor, swords, axes and maces for the shop keeper the Ranger gets the arrows, leather, wolf pelts and similar. The Mage gets the scrolls, some gems/rocks and some lore books). The Shared Pack adds less individual character developments. Let's say I can find a Bead Necklace amulet that's pretty worthless, possible vendor trash. In a Shared Pack that Bead Necklace would go straight into the nearest shop keeper, but if there were 3-4 individualized slots (for weapons, potions, scrolls, texts, shields, items in general) I would possibly place that Bead Necklace into Forton's inventory slot just to add character. Because it does add character. Take these for instance: Example with Sharing: ^What do I sell? What do I keep? It adds character to the group, but it wears more tactically in my mind. I.E. What do I keep and what do I throw away? Example with Individual: Can you figure out who wears what and does anyone keep something out of roleplaying-sentimental value? It adds character, doesn't it?

Looks great! :D This (added with something else I've read somewhere ~it escapes my memory, I think it had something to do with Cipher's) makes me wonder about a sort of "Spirit World" as seen in The Last Airbender. Basically, a character goes into a meditative state and enters a parallel world. The landscape is the same but the creatures are different. And everyone is blue. I can see a lot of interesting things being done with it (Not to mention some puzzles). Entering "Spirit Mode" or having "Spirit Vision" of some form, being able to see a soul fountain in the spirit world, but in the real world it is nothing but a dusty wall. I am thinking about that^ like a "Divine" spell by the way. Kind of how "Detect Evil" is handled. Scenario: A beautiful woman is at a court, kind and benevolent. She is waiting for audience with the king, in this form she is just acting. When "Spirit Vision" or "Detect Evil" is placed upon her, you'll see she's a Cean Gula and the plot thickens... or something. Just an idea. I am more curious about the Cean Gula lore & abilities. Where does she reside? How does she manifest? What can she manifest? Abilities? Powers? Strengths/Weaknesses? Is this a mini-boss type or a swarm type? Is it a controller/conjurer type monster or a glass cannon? Something that sneaks up on you from the darkness, or something that teleports in? Or something you notice from far away when you open a door (only to, of course, quickly close it and back off from the door slowly hoping you weren't seen )?

Interesting! Love the cultures, looking awesome! :D About the Monk, I like the concept and the idea but there's something about it I just can't put my finger on. The update did spark some new ideas by itself. Could a Monk in full plate be a different type of Monk? namely a Medieval-Mecha-Monk! Regardless of those wishes, how does the Wounds function out-of-battle and in-party Wounds? Can I target the Monk and attack him with the rest of my teammates to fill those buckets of Wounds myself?

Part 1: Kickstarter - The invitation Part 2: Fan Response - The shores of Dyrwood Part 3: Development - Keep it at 180 celsius degrees (because I don't know Fahrenheit). We can only wait and see what comes out of it. What landed on the shores of Dyrwood and what was obliterated by the Godbomb? Jokes aside, we are at a stage of support and cheering on right now, until more information is provided (updates~ next week).