PK htiw klaw eriF

I like that they managed to fit Sportsmaster in there.

I don't think improving organization is ever a bad thing, so if it easy to do I'm in. Currently playing NWN2 and BGT, and I think that this would make me more comfortable to have multiple saves for the same character.

I am very happy that the classes will all be balanced well. While they may perform better in some situations, Mages will not be more powerful than the other classes. From what I've seen, this is being done not by weakening the Mage, but by beefing up the other classes(with Soul powers) which is a much better method IMO. Oh and in 3.5 D&D, Monks, Paladins and Barbarians destroyed Mages. Spells don't work so well when you have super high saves and magic resistance(Monks and Paladins with Holy Avenger) or high Fortitude and Will saves coupled with a huge amount of HP. With high level magical equipment available( which typically benefits non-casters more) a caster is lucky to get out a spell before being hit, which will likely make their next Concentration check very hard to make. PE should have a concentration mechanic(casting in front of an enemy should take a bit of focus) but perhaps PE could feature a Talent that halves the DC increase from damage or other effects? This would be a bit more useful than the static bonus given in 3.5 at higher levels. Come to think of it, I think that all talents that are analogues to D&D feats should get better as the character's level increases. The Weapon Focus analogue could add +1 to hit every level for example.

Fighter: "Well, I can stand here and full attack, or I can move and just get one attack. If the planetary alignments are right, I've dedicated my entire build to it, and the enemy isn't bigger than me, I can trip them, knock them over, grab and hold them in place, or charge at them for more damage."Wizard: "Well, I can make illusions of anything I want, summon things to do anything I want, dominate things and make them do anything I want, shapeshift into anything I want, give them a curse that does anything I want, turn the bad guy into a squirrel, send them straight to hell, teleport myself and my friends across the continent instantly, use telekinesis to fling things around, fly around all day, create extradimensional spaces to hide in, turn invisible, spy on bad guys from as far away as I like, send illusory doubles into combat for me, play 20 questions with alien gods, instantly conjure any tool that I need, communicate telepathically with whoever I want, meld the landscape into anything I want, etc. etc. etc., all of this with just my spells that I get for free and being able to invest other aspects into my build into whatever I desire, instead of having to dedicate myself entirely to one trick to be able to attempt it on weak enemies at all."Fighter: "*sobs*"Unless the Wizard gets hit and fails the Concentration check. While said Wizard is wrenching in pain, the Fighter will be hacking into the foe with a +5 weapon, while avoiding damage because of the +5 Mithiral Full Plate and multitude of magic items used for protection. The Rogue will be firing Sneak Attack shots into enemies rushing the Fighter while avoiding getting hit. The Cleric will be busy buffing everyone and occasionally beating something with a mace or unleashing a Flame Strike, all in the comforts of heavy armor and carrying a shield. Not to mention that half the things the Wizard wants to do costs an arm and a leg for the spell components. Or that with magic items, the chances of debuffs working goes down a bit. Or that a Weapon Master build for a Fighter doesn't need to focus on tricks.

I slept pretty well last night(after some intense of cardio) and am now enjoying a protein shake after hitting the gym. I've never got why people drink coffee, that tastes like ass.

I doubt that. I'm sure Hurlwife is a fine woman like my girlfriend who is always right and perfect in everyway and is in no way looking over my shoulder at the moment.

LOL. Actually I was more leading into the fact that I've started fancying some very peculiar chicks recently. I'm hoping its a symptom of being creakingly single for two years. I think the obvious warning indicator was when I realised I quite liked the thought of a bit of Josie Long. Wals, you need a woman badly.

NWN2 and BGT at the moment. Rolling Paladin in both, like a boss.

Other than "Lex" nothing really works.

I agree with Wals, "Legacy Ex" doesn't roll off the tongue. I don't actually have a legacy, instead the range of women I'm interested in is very wide.

In other SCOTUS news, the VRA just got mauled.

It's realistic if you're me. I highly doubt that Mr. Gaider. Unless of course by "everyone" you mean your collection of sock puppets.

I was more referring to the "Well, I would prefer to do something else, so I'll just shut the game down and delete the save." I consider that unsatisfactory, although you seem to indicate that it allows a game like Planescape: Torment to then fit under your criteria. Why can't this work for every game? It can work for every game as long as when you delete said save, the game doesn't contradict anything. I don't think it is optimal at all, but if I come to an impasse where I am forced to do something that would break the PC it is an out.

Perhaps we should find Dr. Who bikinis.

****, this is harder than I thought. Can we just start posting pictures of attractive women?

It depends, if you have to beat everyone you come into contact with off with a stick to prevent them from having sex with you, I'd hardly call that realistic.

Because apparently having 2 moms or 2 dads is worse than being an orphan. Who was this fine gentleman or lady?

IMO, no. In games where you don't know exactly what the PC will say(because the dialogue option you select isn't what the PC actually says) I don't think it works at all. Any games that do let the player know exactly what the PC will say it does work. I do agree that a cRPG doesn't have as much wiggle room as PnP in regards to story or mechanics, because there is not a DM that can interpret a wide range of player actions. I do think that it is possible to provide a good story that works with a wide range of PCs though. I suppose that our differing viewpoints on how a RPG functions is what creates the different preferences. I don't think that romance is required in a RPG(or even needed to have a great RPG), but I think that if the player wants a PC who tries to have sex with everything they see, the player should be able to do that.

I either pick a line based on what the PC would mean by it(rather than what the developer meant by it) or headcanon that the PC did what they wanted and delete the save. I would stick her in the cargo hold and ignore her or headcanon that she left and delete the save.(I found KOTOR 2 very flawed in some regards, more detailed response below) In the respect that nothing is done to define the PC or remove control from the player, I think that TES games are excellent. However between the bad combat mechanics and little reactivity to your choices, TES falls flat. I also think that Torment had fantastically written characters, but I think it succeeds by accounting for a wide range of PCs and motivations. I think KOTOR2 is heavily flawed as a RPG, despite telling a fantastic story. I think Obsidian severely damaged the ability to roleplay the Exile as they saw fit by fleshing out the backstory as much as they did(KOTOR and PST got away with it because the PC was not aware of their past.) They also made you take along the vast majority of companions without any choice in the matter. Main Point: I think that a well-designed RPG should allow the player to create PCs with a multitude of personalities, motives, and goals by letting them decide their PC's story is. I think the way to do that is to create a story that the PC can play several different parts in and not TES, which seems to revolve around letting the player do what they want with little consequence. I don't think that anyone will ever be able to cover every motivation or goal(like seeking to become a god by pelting peasants with kittens or some other insanity), but I do think it is very possible to write a compelling story without forcing a motive or goal on the PC. Perhaps my view is different from some because my background is PnP, where using headcanon is essential because the PC doesn't really exist anywhere but the player's head.

I think Baldur's Gate managed to let the player tell their own story while still providing a decent story. The PC wasn't forced to care about Gorion's death, take a step into Friendly Arm Inn, etc. Perhaps a stronger story could have been told, if the protagonist was a pre-generated character rather than the player's creation, with every choice automatically made for them, but I doubt that BG would have been as enjoyable if they did go for less player control in favor of a better story. Also, I don't see how you can have an RPG without at least a little bit of headcanon, because everything the PC is exists only in your head. Perhaps that is why I have a different few of what make a RPG work than others.

Today I was off work so I decided to get pleasantly drunk.

No you're cool. That comment was not aimed at you. Nobody on this beard is seriously invoking Jesus to this discussion. But it is happening a lot in other forums and the press. My comment was just a general one. GD, that typo makes me think of people sitting on a giant beard.

You design the characters personality, decide what their intent is when you make choices, and end the story when you want. The story of the game is more than just the dialogue choices the PC makes, it also includes travelling, combat, haggling, etc. The problem I have with Gaider's view on narrative is that I don't believe "a reason to care"(which I took as motive) should be supplied by the writer or even assumed at all by the writer. I believe that in a good RPG, who the character is(motivations, emotions, temperament) should come from the player. From his comments in the video that those quotes come from, he doesn't seem to believe that allowing the player to decide who the PC "is" and what they intend with their actions is a valid way to play games. I much prefer Avellone's view, which I take as creating a foundation(mechanics, dialog choices, etc.) and letting the player go from there. TL;DR: The narrative should come from the player deciding who the PC is and implementing that character in the game, not the designer allowing certain narratives. I agree entirely. The only way to ensure the player has a reason to care is to let the player create the PC themselves(with no contradictions to whatever design they may have come up with by the writers) and decide what that characters story is. You may nope be able to tell an EPIC saga or a deeply personal story, but that task is better suited towards film or literature than RPGs. I think that this is the main problem of KOTOR. You aren't offered a choice on the critical matter on whether your character decides to train as a Jedi or not. It gets forced on you. RPGs shouldn't be like that.

I believe that is because TNO was created by the player. All of his motivations, emotions, outlooks came from the player. That is how a RPG should be IMO, give the player control over who their character is don't tell them. I disagree with you on both counts and I think that just shows how good of a job Obsidian did with those games. The issues are not black and white and don't have a universally good choice. They are divisive and require the player to think about them deeply, instead of picking between an obvious good or evil.