PK htiw klaw eriF

And I thought that the Clint Eastwood thing was crazy, did the blonde seem high or something?

I have no idea what I just read. While it would be great if you could be in several kinds of relationships with every NPC(More PC options are always better), it would be much too resource intensive to implement in PE effectively. Lets just let Obsidian do what they want for NPC relationships(I'm sure there will be something akin to "romance",quite a few people do seem to want it.) and enjoy the game.

I think that the skills are the Rogues primary ability though. Sneak attack is quite a nice boost to damage, but Rogues can really shine helping the party get past dangerous traps and other obstacles using their skills, which not many other classes can do. Bards, while relying on their skills quite a bit as well, seemed to favor performance, conversation, and knowledge skills, and their general role in the group was as a back-up for pretty much any other role. To be fair, in 3E, you could get a sneak attack by using the feint feat or flanking the opponent, so move silently and hide were not actually required, even if they were extremely optimal. I think that the biggest trade-off should be an armor penalty, so that while Rogues are capable of wearing heavy armor, wearing light armor is more attractive to Rogues who specialize more in athletic skills, rather than flank attack/feint combat. In terms of general training, I agree.

I wouldn't like it at all. The player should have complete control of the PC's background and personality.

I would like to see statistics derived dialogue sometimes end badly for the speaker. If talking "over the heads" of "stupid" NPCs, maybe they feel insulted and attack the speaker.

I disagree. The Rogue always had more skills than the bard. Bards simply do not have as many skill points or skills available to match the Rogue. I will agree that without a "sneak attack", the Rogues effectiveness at combat is significantly downgraded though.

To be fair, he is right that getting married before having kids reduces the chances of poverty(although that has more to do with having time to get a career started and money saved before paying quite a bit of money to take care of a child, than 2 parents and traditional values). Still a dodge on his part, and quite strange logic. Quite a bit of gun violence comes from those who did grow up in a "traditional" household, just look at the Colorado theater shooting.

Please tell me you're making this up.

It doesn't have anything to do with benefits running out. Unemployed people are not counted for the unemployment % if they are out of the workforce by choice. This can be anything from giving up looking for work to being a stay at home mom. They still get counted if they are looking, no matter if they are receiving benefits or not.

No. Double Fine is what really got it rolling.

Every one in melee combat(not sure about ranged) should get bonuses from flanking an opponent. I suppose Rogues could have some sort of ability to hit harder when attacking foes who are in a vulnerable position(flanked, flat-footed, stunned, etc.), like they do in 3/3.5/Pathfinder, but I don't exactly see why that has to be Rogue exclusive(other classes can take some sort of feat perhaps?). However, we still don't know how the Rogue's soul based abilities will factor in to this. From the description of them, it does sound like it will favor stealth and surprise attacks, so I suspect that Rogues will play similar to how they do in 3/3.5/Pathfinder. I believe that the biggest role of the Rogue is utilizing various skills to overcome obstacles. It could be my preference for playing 3.5E and Pathfinder, but I find that Rogues are the most viable when there are plenty of skills for them to utilize in the game, otherwise they just come off as weaker warriors who can usually dodge attacks easier. With PE, I'm quite sure that there will be quite a few situations where having a Rogue who is able to use their kills in a myriad of ways will be quite helpful. I suppose I could go into a great bit of detail on how I believe that the base progression of rogues(skill points, feats, and abilities) should be handled but I would prefer to discuss that in a thread about all classes. And my post is already quite long to boot.

Not really - If you're non-human you're still treated like a nord. Silly to hear that a city is keeping demi-humans out, only to be able to wonder about at will. I meant that it never tries to define my PC for me by "never contradicting any character design the player comes up with for the PC". Sorry if I wasn't clear about that.

Tall order there. No. You can't.

My posts in this thread are not about defending DA2. I have a feeling that that point was missed, however. Oh I was just remarking on that it seems that wherever you post someone is bashing the game. Is there anywhere that you can get away from it? I hate DA2. I generally will list the reasons why I dislike it(Dialogue wheel, combat system, linear gameplay) and try to avoid the "LOL WORST GAEM EVAR!!" that pops up pretty much everywhere.

So Alan, do you enjoy defending DA2 on both the BSN and here? It must get rather tiring.

I can't wait for this damn election to be over. I'm tired of getting calls asking me to vote a straight republican ticket or people bothering me when I'm gassing up. 2 more days and it will finally be over. Personally I want Obama to win for the sole reason that I live in Texas and predict that quite a few rednecks will do something stupid and get themselves killed. Which means less congestion on my way to and from work due to their vehicles falling apart or an unsecured item falling from their truck. Also the sheer amount of rage will tickle my funnybone.

I'm confused by what those who want xp tied to only objectives want. Something like ME2/3, where no matter how you played you got the same reward? Personally I hate this. XP should be rewarded for everything the PC does successfully, not just for completing a quest or objective. I also dislike the reasoning behind it. It sounds like hand-slapping players, which is worse than hand-holding them.

I think doing something like 3/3.5E an Pathfinder would be best. I want to keep them relatively simple(so that I can do calculations on a piece of paper) and avoid unnecessary complication.

No. It isn't like Obsidian will make PE into an MMO anyways. Between the costs and hostile reaction from the backers of the original PE, it isn't a feasible option, not to mention quite a few MMOs crash and burn(SWTOR anyone?).

I like romance in RPGs. It can provide different ways for the PC to interact with companions and can allow more role-playing opportunities, just like every relationship(like rivalry, respected enemy, or friendship) can. Most of the time I am quite cynical about it though. It usually ends up being pretty one-dimensional and blatant fanservice. Bioware games especially have this problem and it seems that other than cinematics and 'splosionz, all they focus on are creating characters(if you can call their one-line cardboard cutouts that) who scream "I'm an LI, have sex with me!". I don't like that at all. However this is Obsidian. If there is romance, I'm sure that it will be different from the sappy fanservice that usually occurs, will have a thematic purpose, and most importantly be built around a character that is interesting first and a romance second. Here is a list of suggestions on how to them right. Make sure that they are a well-developed character first, and that a romance plot makes sense with the existing character. Don't just craft a NPC for the sake of romance and don't slap romance on a character who it would be awkward for. Don't tie a large chunk of character development solely to romance. Someone stated that this is usually a problem and I agree. Character development should occur in all types of relationships, not just one type. Have friction occur between party members (also should happen between all types of relationships). If a party member thinks you "stole" a character they were interested in, then they should be pissed off, not just smile and act all happy. TL;DR version; I like romance in RPGs, although I'm usually apprehensive about them in most games. This is Obsidian though, if they do it, it will be well done ans serve a thematic purpose instead of just being blatant fanservice.

There wasn't one in DAO....... In fact, DAO actually had a good dialogue system.

I don't mind a marker indicating a location of some kind(like a cave or town), but I dislike a floating arrow above an objective.

Share the link. Im serious. I just reinstalled DA2 30 minutes ago. Ran through the tutorial. Fraps'd it. It's taking up 25 GB. My second drive is almost full so I'm going to have to play the game in small spurts and convert them as I go. So there's no link yet and I doubt I'll have any substantial produced until a week from now. But I'm gonna do it. I'll assuredly post the link here when I get the first video done. I feel sorry for you. I wouldn't replay DA2 if you paid me. I especially disliked the dialogue system, which made my playstyle impossible.

Mechanics that function well and compliment other mechanics Interesting and well executed concepts Functions well for it's purpose. A RPG should at least allow role-playing, for example. Replayability Content that doesn't scream "filler", and a good amount of good content(I like at least 20 hours)

I don't mind showing the player a meter or some other form of reference for how a companion feels about the PC. It just seems to be an easy way to keep track of how companions feel about the PC, which does get difficult when I'm juggling several playthroughs at once. I also liked the approval spam in DAO actually(since some seem to be talking about it). I always thought of it as a way to get approval points when the PC said something they meant positively, but was taken negatively by the NPC. The gift represented the off-camera conversation where everything was cleared up. I also would have liked insult spam quite a bit too.