PK htiw klaw eriF

Are you arguing for a static HP or for a system where HP progression is not affected by class, but still by level? I could get behind the latter, but I have some issues with the former(namely balancing low-level combat without making it tedious). I do agree that balance should take in to account more universal defenses(like saving throws) and non-universal defenses(like class abilities). Also D&D scaling was not very good. Saving throws grew at a much slower rate than spells, so succeeding against a spell was pretty difficult. Anyway my proposed HP/Defense system: HP= 10+Con modifier at level one, with 5-6+CON modifier gained at each level. Stamina is (20+CON modifier)Level. Specific defense values(saving throws) vary by class, but increase at a faster rate than they did in D&D to avoid large discrepancies between the saving throw bonus and the bonus put towards DC. More classes have unique defenses against damage, which vary in effectiveness towards type of damage(a Monk's wound's may not be as effective against magic as an arcane veil).

I really don't know what to tell you. No one's arguing the meaning of "specifically," yet you think that's what this is about. The ruleset "specifically states" that you gain levels with experience, and you gain HP when you gain levels, and how much, and when, etc. That stuff isn't ambiguously stated. It is "stated" in the rulebook. Therefore, that's how that world works. A character in the DnD world gains levels and HP. However, the terminology and concepts of "HP" and "levels" don't actually inhabit the fantasy world. They exist outside of it, as a liaison between the player and the game world. Why? Because the only way we know how to govern interactions with something as dynamic as an entire fantasy world is through math. So, yes, it is specifically stated. In the ruleset. The ruleset governs the game world. The game world exists without knowledge of this governance, because it has no need of such knowledge. If Trashman could've worded it better to prevent confusion, then so be it. But now we're clarifying (and have been for like 5 posts). Words mean what they mean, and he meant what he meant. You're not even arguing semantics anymore, because I've already clarified, and you're saying that my clarification is false and doesn't exist, and that your suggested meaning is the only possible meaning, whatsoever. You're just being silly at this point. I've nothing more to say. I was just trying to help clarify so you didn't have to waste your breath arguing that obviously-misunderstood point of his. It is what it is. *shrug* I don't think you understand the full context of the argument. Because reality is always the starting point. Unless specificly stated that X works differently, you look to the real world. Trashman's entire thing on this thread has been railing against HP increasing with level because it does not fit the laws of the real world(and because he personally doesn't like fantasy that is too fantastical). He is talking about lore in that statement.

I was trying to establish what a figure for the static HP system Trashman wants, so I used what would be 5 god hits as the level. I know that you can defend against good hits. Nothing is wrong with them, but if the game requires you to use them, it is bad. Even worse is when you require resist X damage talents, because that replaces HP increasing with another stat that essentially does the same thing(makes you harder to kill). Yes, but if one caster gets off one successful spell then the whole party is dead. Those are ways to prevent an ambush. I'm talking about getting killed for just getting caught in one. The party should be grievously wounded and/or at a big disadvantage, but they shouldn't be slain out right. I think you misunderstood what I meant by "low-level combat". I meant combat at low-levels, not combat with lower-level foes. So a system where characters gain about 6 HP(modified by CON) per level and start at 10 HP(+CON Modifier)sounds good to you? Because that would be my ideal system.

Finally got around to dealing with some accounts I haven't touched in years. There is a bit of relief in knowing I won't have to do that anytime soon.

No he said SPECIFICALLY. Which means explicitly, free of ambiguity, distinctive, etc. If he meant something else, he should have been more clear, because when using "specifically stated" it has to be stated without a doubt that X is true. They couldn't. But how could they know that level, an abstract concept that they have no way of accurately measuring, is what determines how resilient each person is? He didn't just say "stated", he said "specifically stated". Which greatly narrows the scope of "stated".

Well this looks like it could get ugly........ Hats off to Zoraptor, takes balls to piss on the Steam anthill.

I just really don't think that's what he's saying, in that one particular regard. I dunno, maybe he could come in and clarify. I think you're confused by the specifics of the word "stated," and you're thinking that nowhere does someone necessarily tell you that such things happen. However, in D&D, the ruleset "tells" you how everything works. Basically, health represents your well-being, exactly like in the real world. Only, in D&D, you gain the ability to take a greater number of sword strikes to the torso without dying, unlike in the real world. So... health - based directly on reality (bleeding, unconsciousness, death, poison, abstracted forms of physiological damage, etc.). Increasing amounts of health - completely fictitious amendment to reality's health "system." I really believe that's all he's getting at (again, on that one particular note), and I agree with that, specifically. To quote him directly That statement declares that if something is not explicitly confirmed, then it must work as it does in the real world. As for D&D, yes the rules tell you, but the setting does not. No lore ever confirms that people get harder to kill as experience is gained, but it does happen. It is an implied fact, not an explicitly stated fact.

I'd honestly rather let the federal government have more influence over my home than the one located in Austin, TX. You know the guys who though that getting women considering an abortion to have to wait 24 hours and watch the screen while the doctor explains what the fetus is currently doing was more important than making sure schools were fully funded.

No it isn't. Real World laws do not determine how the PE universe operates, the PE universe laws do. So you have an easier time believing in mind control, various magical creatures, and soul powers being common place than in someone getting more powerful as they gain more power over their soul? Other than "I don't like it" or "It doesn't make sense using real world laws" how? How is attributing supernatural abilities to supernatural power bad? You haven't shown any evidence to support that claim. You haven't pointed to one system(with the equivalent of 5-th level D&D spells) where it has worked. You haven't explained how your system would accommodate increasing powers of spells and soul powers and still keep level 1 foes a legitimate threat. Yes I can. Unbalanced High-Level combat and reliance on resist X damage equipment/talents: Assuming the starting HP will allow a character to survive about 5 good sword hits(the amount you said your mod allowed). Good sword hit= 6-8 damage, HP= 30-40. At level 10, casters would be throwing around fireballs that deal 10-60 damage. On average, the party would be killed by just two castings of the spell, or enemy attacks after the spell has been cast. Sneak attacks would deal 6-36 damage, so rogues could ambush the party and kill them before they had a chance to react. Pretty much any high-level encounter would kill the entire party within 3 actions, unless they were equipped with resit X damage items or possessed resist X damage talents. Tedious low-level combat: HP starts at higher values to avoid characters dying quickly at later levels. Lets say about 100 HP. Enemies take at least thirteen good hits to take down, assuming max damage would be dealt and they were unarmored. Armored(who would probably make up the majority of foes) enemies would take longer, especially if you were not dealing max damage with each blow. Taking in to account that half the hits would likely be grazes, killing one foe at low-level would take some time, group even more. Because you don't get to assume what I want or put words in my mouth. Which you keep doing. Do I have to explain to you again that I don't want the mechanics to be exactly like they were in the IE games or have you finally realized that I do not want to see PE copypasta mechanics from the IE games.

No it isn't. People are not the same in the PE setting as they are in the real world. They are able to call upon the power of their souls to accomplish amazing(would easily be considered supernatural in real world) feats. Something can be true in the PE world without being specifically stated, because there may be no in-setting way of stating "X works differently here than in the real world" because they will have no knowledge of the real world. I believe what Trashman means is that the starting basis for a fantasy world is the real world. i.e. Here's a world, with ground and sky and people who breath air, and there's physics, etc. NOW, let's add in magic and change what needs to be. Let's make some other amendments to the nature of this world. Let's add in a race that doesn't exist (but is still based on facets of real-life humanity). Etc. I don't know of anyone who starts with 100% non-realistic stuff, then works backwards to tie it into our reality so that our realistic human brains can actually feel an affinity for it. That's pretty much the sole reason our fantasy worlds need verisimilitude. Without it, the entire world/lore would not be at all... intuitive, for lack of a better word. Trashman is saying that of X isn't explicitly stated, then it is the same as the real world. Which isn't true. In the D&D settings, it isn't ever explicitly stated that people get harder to kill as they become more powerful, but it happens. In fantasy settings there are both explicit rules and implied rules that may differ from the real world.

A fool? No, he's dedicated statist. If Obama is a statist then he is terrible at being one. Not only has he failed to gain control over all means of production, but he relinquished his hold on those he did possess.

He merely stated that the character was acting as a human shield for another, not that anyone was forcing them to do it. Really, either way, you'd probably still have some degree of a bond form. Whether you hate doing it, or love doing it, protecting someone and preserving their life on a constant basis is going to affect the regard in which they hold you. I got that, I want to see the opposite of that. Which is someone who would be ordered to take the brunt of the damage and become increasingly negative.

Getting the government "out of marriage" sounds like a good idea, but is too complicated to be accomplished anytime soon. For one(in the US) marriage is handled partially by the states some of which have very different polices. Trying to get the majority of Republicans in the south to agree to get out of marriage is an extremely difficult task,because the majority of them rely on campaigning against "the gay agenda" to get elected. Gays should have the right to get married. It is a contract that they should be able to enter with the partner of their choice if they choose to. Don't like gay marriage, don't marry someone of the same sex. As far as the destruction of religious liberty, seriously? The gays aren't going to swarm en masse to force you to marry them and/or sue you. The vast majority would just get married somewhere that would be willing to marry them, then go along and not bother you at all. Those that would try to sue you would not have much of a case, unless they can prove you denied their request for other reasons.

So the VP isn't "Officially Retarded"? He just made a gaffe? Some people should learn what "Officially" and "Retarded" actually mean. To jump in to the pit of the gun control debate...... A shotgun is a good home defense weapon. Short range, powerful, don't need to be especially accurate. An assault rifle with an extended clip is not as good of a home defense weapon. Assault rifles are much easier to use to massacre people because they can fire faster than your average shotgun, extended clips are easy to come by, etc. Banning someone from getting easy access to an assault rifle will not stop them from killing someone if they want to, but will limit their ability to do so.

Custom spells could be cool, but if PE spells scale with caster level(preventing 3 sleep/fear spells that work on enemies of different levels) and stay useful at higher levels, then it may not really be worth the time or be very effective. Enchantment has already been promised as well, so we will probably get to create our own magical weapons/artifacts. I just hope the crafting systems are generally better than in D&D derived games and TES games.

I want to see the opposite. I would like to see someone who is constantly used as the human shield get pissed off at everyone after a while. After all being the guy/girl whose duty is to be beaten with weaponry would probably make one feel negative, especially if their were others who rarely get harmed.

While in some cases it this might be interesting, familiarity is still a big factor. And because we're generally most familiar with reality, a fantasy world must always uphold a certain degree of realism if it's supposed to be appealing. The most successful fantasy settings are those with worlds where basic physical laws like gravity apply, and with humans as protagonists, not insectoids. Of course tastes may differ on how familiar a certain setting is supposed to be, and it might be possible to adapt to even the strangest scenarios after a while. But we're talking about a game that's supposed to resemble the IE games. And while there is magic in these games, there is still a world outside of magic, which is similiar to the real world. If this wouldn't be the case for PE, it would be completely different from any IE game, and practically almost every other fantasy setting. Believability has more to do with logical coherence of a setting and a story I think. Yes, but is having HP being tied to level and class as unbelievable in a world where people can tap in to the power of their souls to accomplish amazing feats as people eating out of their noses and walking on their hands? My point was that the reality of the setting is what is important in determining what is logical, not the reality of the real world.

No it isn't. People are not the same in the PE setting as they are in the real world. They are able to call upon the power of their souls to accomplish amazing(would easily be considered supernatural in real world) feats. Something can be true in the PE world without being specifically stated, because there may be no in-setting way of stating "X works differently here than in the real world" because they will have no knowledge of the real world. Then you are seriously arguing for realism in the wrong game. PE is possibly even more fantastical(judging by the lore presented) than the majority of D&D settings. You have to put reality away to believe half the stuff that is happening in PE. Believing that someone can become harder to kill as they gain experience and master their soul is easily not the most unbelievable aspect in PE. You mean other than your proposal would make it hard to have balanced combat and would likely result in a) tedious low-level combat, b) unbalanced high-level combat, and/or c) reliance on resist x damage feats or items. To which you replied by stating I was incompetent at balancing and lacked imagination, but failed to show a system(with around 6-th level D&D spells) where your proposal works? Funny, I didn't say that "a spiritual successor must be mechanically the same as the IE games" I did point out that your claim that your proposed mechanic was not that different from what was in the IE games was false. I've explained that to you several times. I've even stated that the IE games had extremely flawed mechanics.

Am I the only one who thinks that these threads should only be read while inebriated.

No. But there are plenty of nude orc female mods, apparently. Because that is just so wildly arousing, boar-faced green women: Good to know people are working on stuff that matters. Who needs good gameplay when you got orc titties?

Oh another one...... Seriously, everyone knows that mainstream RPGs are being watered down, quite a few people don't like it. Also, Morrowind is FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR from what I'd consider a perfect RPG. I'd argue Morrowind is where the mainstream RPG slide towards actiony gameplay that fits more on a console than PC began.

Then why do you assume that something is not logical in PE if you can not know if it is logical in PE? Haven't the majority of your arguments been based on what real world physics? Real world laws that may not be true in PE? Yes we can all sit around making justifications why X should/should not be, we already did that with the dragons remember? But we are discussing a specific fictional setting where it is confirmed that people can tap in to the powers of their souls and magic is quite common. We also do not know all the laws of the universe for the setting, so assuming something is illogical in that universe because it is illogical in the real world isn't really valid. Then the problem is you, not the game or game lore. If it fits the lore of the setting, yes. No. There has to be suspension of disbelief to accept magic, different humanoid races, several fantastical creatures, etc. That is what EVERYONE here is trying to do. You want PE to be some realism simulator where low level characters can still be a threat to high-level characters and have spent the majority of this thread advocating for it. But those older games were STRATEGY games. RPGs have had separate HP and Armor/Defense since the first edition of D&D was written. Point out one RPG where HP is is Armor, Dodge, Parry, etc rolled in to one stat.

Now we're talkin'! *High fives Ffordesoon* Yea Fire Emblem definitely isn't your grandmother's SRPG. Chapter 3 was the first time I had to realize that i'd better start taking it as serious or more serious than Advance Wars (made by the same company which I totally didn't know). What happened (because I am a *complete* newbie to Fire Emblem) is I sent Fredrick in to mop up the top half of the map. He proceeded to get one-shot by the guy with the hammer then Sumia bit it to an archer then My Unit got crit and one shot. Bing! Bang! BOOM! You're dead! I generally *start* playing ALL of my games on Hard or above. I just hit Chapter 6 of this game and to think there's a Lunatic and a Lunatic+ difficulty makes me want to cry. This might be the only game I can't complete on max difficulty and I play Ys games as well. I really hope I get better at this game. I saw a developer round table where one of the devs flat out admits that Lunatic difficulty 'just ain't right' basically. I want someone to hold me... Edit: This thread is now about Fire Emblem: Awakening. Oh, and I bought a Gameboy 3DS XL simply to play this game. It was well worth it. Edit 2: We got any Fire Emblem veterans in here that can give us newbies some advice? Maybe I can be of some assistance. FEA is a bit different from most FE games, because now rescue(pair up in FEA) gives you bonuses instead of penalties and you can grind and class change, which can allow you to max out stats on pretty much any character. To make up for that, enemies stats seem to have been jacked up and the game seems to be generally harder than pretty much every other FE game. Still the basic rules are the same and here is some advice for you new guys(BTW welcome aboard!). Pay attention to the weapon triangle. Switching weapons can reduce the amount of damage and chance to hit, take this in to account when dealing with foes, particularly axe users. Keep the team pretty diverse. You will want a good mix of units to rely on. Avoid using units that will rot in the barracks. XP is precious, you do not want someone who you do not intend to use sucking it away from you are going to use and need strong. Heal early and heal often. Healers have no other way to gain XP than by healing(or doing other **** with the staff) and if you want to promote around the same time as the other units, you will want to heal as much as possible. Wait for promotion. While it is a long climb to get to level 20, it is well worth the wait. Those 10 extra level ups make a huge difference and if you promote too early(right at level 10) your unit(s) will get their asses handed to them. Conserve your weapons. Weapons wear out and new ones cost money, make sure that you don't waste your fancy silver weaponry on foes steel or even iron could have handled. Other than that basic advice, here is my personal thoughts on the classes. Thieves kick ass. They can promote to Assassin or Trickster, but IMO the latter isn't that great and the former is just amazing. Swordmasters are also great. They won't get hit much and can double attack pretty much anyone. Berserkers are almost always a better choice than Warriors. You will have to reclass to get one(Vaike can do it) but it is well worth it. Heroes are really good. They are incredibly well balanced and work well against pretty much any foe. Promote fighters into Heroes instead of Warriors if they can reclass into Berserkers. Paladins are much better than Great Knights. Great Knights aren't bad, they just don't work as well as a cavalier promotion. Also Generals aren't that great on most maps. Sages are great. I'd promote your Clerics/Priests into this instead of War Monk/War Cleric, unless you reclassed a physical class into a Cleric/Priest or the character had really high STR. Bow Knights are a good first promotion, but Snipers beat them out later in the game. Dark Mages are rare, but they can be pretty good if used right. Sorcerers are a little weaker with magic than sages, but make up for it by having good defense. Great Lords are good, but Lucina has better caps than Chrom. I'll wait for the DLC with the Demon Fighter Scroll in it before I endorse a final class for Chrom. Grandmaster is in the same situation as Great Lord. Wyvern units are pretty good, think flying General for promotion. In this game the alternate promotion is a but weaker but makes up for it by having higher speed, skill, and resistance. Pegasus units are also good. Great against mages and quick foes, by watch out for bow users and high power units.

Not in the IE games. Not in the NWN games. Not in Arcanum. Not in Fallout. Not in D&D. They have always been separate factors from HP in EVERY game that resembles PE. Show me one Vanilla Party-Based RPG that has HP combined with armor, dodge, parry, etc. How do you know that is true in PE? It could be possible that as someone gains more control over the power of their soul, they are able to take more damage in the setting. What is true in the real world is not necessarily true in a fantasy world. I'm not people. I don't argue for realism in PE because it is out of place in a fantasy setting where magic is as common as it is in PE. This discussion is about power of classes. If you want to constantly derail it to discuss your ideas, **** off and start your own damn thread. I played games with tons of different mechanics and enjoyed quite a few, but unlike you, I don't try to force realism-based mechanics in to a unrealistic setting.

Because Challenge XP isn't Objective XP. Objective XP is awarded by completing objectives ONLY. That means the player has to have an objective and is not rewarded with XP for dealing with random encounters or wandering in to a dungeon(or other area) for no other reason than they want to explore. Challenge XP is awarded by completing challenges. This could dealing with a group of monsters, getting through a treacherous dungeon, or completing an objective. It would also be method neutral allowing non-combat solutions to be as rewarding as combat. It also rewards players who get through a difficult random encounter with XP. I think incinerating this thread is a good idea, unless Indra shows up with his/her positron blaster.