PK htiw klaw eriF

Eh, 19% given rounding. 19% is "about" 20%. Using "about" as synonymous with "approximately", which is what I assume Hurlshot meant by "about".

Don't you know better than to use facts in an Oby thread? Yea.... except that isn't correct by most estimations, and Oby is pretty good with his/her facts. Much better than most others posting in these threads. By most estimations, smoking peaked sometime in the 50s, and began declining after then, though not buy much in the 60s. The two decades that saw the largest drop in smoking were the 70s and 80s, where over the course of those two decades smoking amongst the adult population went from around ~40% to ~28%. Since around 1990 the prevalence of smoking dropped somewhere around ~5%. The last ~20 years has not seen a huge decrease in smoking, despite all the draconian laws that have been put in place in the last 10 or so. Those are of course estimations. And if one looks around at the various figures out there, there are some differences between the various estimates. Oby? Good with facts? Only if you are a bat**** ruski or libertarian who thinks RT tells the unbiased truth. Also this. 19.3% is about 20% in most circles. no?

Don't you know better than to use facts in an Oby thread?

@OP I like or am neutral on everything but... The problem I have with this is I fear the game may lock the PC out of a faction or quest line for some arbitrary reason. To use Skyrim as a reference, it would be like being locked out of the Dark Brotherhood faction because the PC sided with the Empire in the civil war, because the PC kills the Emperor in the DB quest line. Of course there are occasions to lock the player out of factions(like if it is public knowledge that the PC does things that violate their values), but I believe that it would be better to let the player choose what is right for their PC. So if someone wants to join a group and later assassinate their leader as a task to another, they should be able to if they believe that it fits their PC. As for the whole ten commandments, I think I may post some tomorrow, I am very sick at the moment and a bit too tired to adequately express the top ten things I would like to see PE do.

What for? Extra mouths to feed that bring no utility to what has officially been stated to be a combat-centric game? Do you want to bugger them? Or to kill them? I don't recall anyone at Obsidian announcing that P:E would be a child-rearing simulation. Human Sacrifice?

They were probably pissed off that the squid was gone.

To be honest, I don't care about animations at all. If I had to choose, I would go for combat(includes dodge, block, and parry) animations over death animations.

Quite a bit of fear porn in this thread. BTW Girl 2 looks better, 8/10.

Am I the only person who thinks that romances are just another type of relationship and they don't make or break a game? Obsidian isn't Bioware, if romances are in the game, other relationships will get plenty of attention as well, if they are not, the characters will still be well written and complex. Half the people here need to just chill the **** out. Romance, like ANY GOOD relationship, should be written with the intention of allowing roleplaying, serving a thematic purpose, and providing one route for character development(there should always be an alternative). They should not break the NPC's character simply for the purpose of letting the player get what they want(I don't want to get into the whole **** to pixels thing again) or be the only possible relationship(or contain a much larger share of content than other relationships). IMO, pretty much anyone who is strongly anti or pro romance comes off as unreasonable at best. I especially loved it a while back when they started calling each other the same thing(emotionally stunted IIRC).

1. Horrible mechanics 2. Gameplay/Story segregation 3. Overly restrictive classes 4. Action gameplay 5. Level Scaling 6. Doors that magically lock behind the party during combat

GURPS, Megaversial, Shadowrun.

It seemed to me that he wasn't very consistent. He claimed that the purpose of the 2nd amendment was to protect the citizenship from the government, yet does not want people to have the same weaponry as the government. And he sounded like a 12 year old. And looking sane next to Alex Jones is not very hard, I think not looking sane next to Alex Jones is what is near impossible.

I don't ever think I have had that problem with a game with well documented mechanics and a decent manual. I love being able to design the PC's abilities before I play the game. Yeah, Arcanum was not very well designed IMO. Arcanum would have been much better if different point systems were used for different things or if there were different costs between abilities(like GURPS) and if the combat system was better designed.

Monks being all-powerful at later levels. Not being able to craft almost everything. Elves.

I could see someone writing a guide on how to get multiple lovers to have several "state if vengeance" abilities active.

That's why i also sad that i don't want him in PE. Mayby some kind of psychopath actincg simillar but not him. (doesn't fitt in setting) The problem with a psychopath is that unless they are incredibly powerful, it is hard to have one as a villain because they would end up killing all of their followers or screwing up their own plans. Someone calculating and with some measure of self-control makes for a much more effective and believable villain. The powerfull psychopath can be servan of someones stronger and more calculated. Serving him as wardog, or killer etc. It whoud be nice to seeing some plot twist when this type of character break the chain and even atack his old master ... Meh, the servant attacking the master and taking his place has been done quite a bit.

That's why i also sad that i don't want him in PE. Mayby some kind of psychopath actincg simillar but not him. (doesn't fitt in setting) The problem with a psychopath is that unless they are incredibly powerful, it is hard to have one as a villain because they would end up killing all of their followers or screwing up their own plans. Someone calculating and with some measure of self-control makes for a much more effective and believable villain.

The problem is that no character is totally original. I think that the purpose of this thread is to discuss what kind of villain we would like to see.

A Doom-like villain would work better in PE because they would actually have plans and desires that can be independent of the PC. The problem with Joker is that he defines himself completely as being an anti-Batman, so he does not have any long-term goals or desires besides being Batman's nemesis, which is why Joker never kills Batman.

Yes, Doom is water, Joker is fire. Water douses fire, water wins. Batman is intelectiualist to so i must agre he whoud propably win (and then bleed out) Why ? i think so ? Joker will almost never hesitated he will burn himself if its gonna bring him victory, doom whoud popably awoid him becouse he don't wanna fight meaningless fights that joker so loves And Doom is a powerful sorcerer, tech expert, and has the resources of an entire country behind him. He has a bit more power and ability than the Joker.

Yes, Doom is water, Joker is fire. Water douses fire, water wins.

Yes. They're considering having it so that if you don't hit, you glance unless you missed by a LOT...then you actually miss. And then throwing in the possibility of moving that hit range up and down based on various potential abilities. Thank you. I could see that working. You Critical when x(the roll) is y above AC, Hit when x is (AC+(y-1)) to AC, Graze when x is (AC-1) to (AC-(y-1), and Miss when X is (AC-y).

I hate it when (in some games) every time the PC flirts with a NPC they are attracted to the PC, where every time the PC is nice to a NPC they take it well, and every time the PC insults a NPC they take it badly. I want some reactions to be unexpected, which adds flavor IMO. Maybe someone likes you more when you insult them because they feel you are being honest. Maybe you piss someone off because you were kind to them. Maybe flirtation is ignored because the NPC is oblivious to the PC's intentions.

Doesn't pretty much any character believe they are in the right? Anyway, **** the Joker, he and Batman are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too overrated. Now if we could get someone like good ole Green Goblin or Doctor Doom that would be cool. Hell Doom wouldn't actually look too out of place in a fantasy game.

I think I'm a bit lost, has the proposed system been amended since the initial description on page 1 of this thread?