choasrepeated

One of the reasons I sponsor games like this is to avoid the whole publisher model due to regional pricing (Im from Australia orginally). Will this pricing result in people in Australia whole did not back this game having to pay significantly more than thoose elsewhere?

One of the things I loved about IE games was the detailed manuals and tables, I had to double my level when I heard the manual was at the $50 level

One of the things I loved about IE games was the detailed manuals and tables, I had to double my level when I heard the manual was at the $50 level

Don't forget druids as well :b And rangers and barbarians are just glorified shamanistic versions of the paladin and monk.. But seriously paladins, priests, monks and bards (I know its not quite a bard) are common RPG troupes

Highly unlikely, just like it is unlikely they'll be like enchanters (covered by ciphers anyways) from guildwars or eq. Although you probably could roll a priest like ritualistic chanter which would match closely the chantry style characters if you wanted.

While I agree that is true it would be great have to point out that it has been done. In bg2 as you say, but also ofcourse god of war, the game that let's you play as one of the four the horse men (can't remember its name), devine divinity, arguably titans quest, and quite a few others. Still that's not to say its inclusion would be a bad thing. There could be a dragon lance style trail of the twins story line even...

Arg, I felt the same way, just was hoping no one would state that as now everyone is going to spam how atheist paladins don't make sense. That said when I read the paladin description I did a happy little dance.

I love the new classes this will let me build amoral paladins and regilous and lawful bards. Should produce interesting parties.

So if belief is the maker of the planes then atheists threaten everything with their questioning, can we kill the heretics then? See the whole idea is already inspiring story arc's. A church may very well feel that way, paradoxically justifying the god slayers own prejudices.

That would actually be quite cool. But if the deities (or, plot twist!: the simply extremely powerful mortals masquerading as gods) wield god-level powers and are impossible to locate, the atheist movement would be a short-lived affair. And as I suspect that the deities of this world will have those powers, I doubt we'll see any crusading atheists in Project Eternity. Warhammer 40k actually springs to mind on this. That is the gods there were parasitic feeding off souls. As for crusading atheists its undeniable some people will role play these. As role-playing the only remaining question is one of mechanics and scope.

Well we know from the last update it isn't. It was very clear that the practitioner's faith sparked the power of their soul rather than the god in question granting the abilities.

it goes hand in hand with the whole perceived sexism thing... it's pretty barf inducing to be honest. Video games are notorious for this in recent years (*obligatory BioWare reference!*). My biggest fear is that in Obsidian's writers' minds these things might be synonymous with the concept of "mature themes". Which is always most likely either a grimdark setting or a bunch of Evil People Who Fight for Good (or vice versa). As much as I hate the whole "mature themes" schtick meaning "sexual progressiveness" or make-believe-fantasy-atheism (for the love of rage, they're there, we can see them, they talk to us, we heal people for crying out loud!) some other horse**** like that... I don't see how that relates to Grimdark. I do love myself some Grimdark. I'm confused, what do you consider mature themes if not things that raise questions of race, religion, gender politics or the human condition? These are fair game in fantasy and sci-fi novels in a way not available for more serious genres so why not in games?

Given bg:2 flirted with the idea and there is a fanasty theme of murder the gods. It wouldn't be out of place. Just saying. Also this is anti-theist not atheist.

Oh you stripped out that it was me you where quoting. Never mind. Before I respond to any thing else I feel its worth noting that a mage really isn't a preist without belief in a god. A preist fills a separate roll in a party to a mage. Im afraid I dont follow your logic that "an atheist preist does not make sense because an atheist preist does not make sense". That is a tautology. Caps dont really do much to help make your poiint either. I would love to know the reason it doesn't make sense. I trust though from the focus on preist you agree atheist monks and ruids at least make sense. So I appreciate that. As for why I think it does make sense: The game designers have indicated that the souls themselves play an active roll in the game universe. The description of the preist class included this statement: " here are ranks of dedicated adventuring or mercenary priests who have turned the flame of their faith into a spark to ignite the power of their souls. Such men and women have found a divine link to their chosen deity, but their abilities stem solely from within." So they have clearly indicated that a preist's spells are examples of the preist's power not of their chosen ethos. Thus an atheist preist could be described as someone who has turned the flame of their faith in humanity (elfanity? Dwarfanity? whatever) or themself or the rejection of the need for gods into a spark to ignite the power of their souls. See fits perfectly fine. As for it being illogical I have been told that in this world god exists, and his presents is self evident and not to belief is illogical... Yet they still exist in our world. Why would this fanasty setting be any less rich on this subject. Especially considering one of the reasons the developers wanted to use kick starter was so they could explorer mature themes. Pretty sure discussions about the existance of super powerful intervening pregenitors and if those pregenitors exist have rights on the ownership of mortals firmly falls in the category of mature conversations regardless your view on the answer. So to repeat myself, stating a blind assertion in caps doesn't prove your point. Nor do tautologies also if you dont want to play an atheist priest then well dont. peace out

The lady of pain has come up a bit and I have to chip in on that. On other notes I'd like to see lovecraftian gods, warhammer 40k gods, even fun entities love the american gods. Tricksters and bullies. Creatures of madness and pain. Just like you cant become a ceo without breaking a few laws, I doubt you could become a god in a fanastasy setting without being dark at the core.

Theres always the dark realms of Warhammer 40k where gods a parasites that feed on souls and require active measures (Like the god emperor or the eldar soul stones) to protect the souls of the dead from consumption. Or the twisted Cthulu approach of the souls having access to more arcane locations and the erosion or even supplanting of ones soul. Im interested what community imspired packs will come from this.

Choas verus Order is a better measure(Ye olde warhammer 40k where everyone is evil, its just a question if they have ocd or adhd) good verus evil is just to plain subjective. The reputation system they are looking at makes more sense to me...

I see alignment, especially in DnD terms, as both a role-playing crutch and a symptom of the entire DnD universe. "Demons" and the like, all playing off the more primitive aspects of human moral folklore. As an RP crutch, it sets the basic template for character behavior. Besides being so fundamental to the DnD universe (planes of existence, etc.), I didn't like how it really tied down the classes (although that may have changed since 4ed, dunno). One of the best things about PS:T was, not merely turning around the hard-coded alignment expectations of some races (Dak'kon, Fall-from-Grace), but the fluidity of action upon alignment. There,alignment is an internal indicator--since PS:T was a very "internal" philosophical game, it made sense to use alignment this way. But I don't see too many other games emulating this kind of story necessary for that kind of mechanic. I really like rreputation instead of alignment, because that shifts the internalized RP mode of storytelling to a space that emphasizes interaction with the world at a narrative and dialogic level--that means we can absolutely expect significant, meaningful immersive interaction that gives shape to our character's "life" in the game. The other problem I found with DnD alignment systems is they really relate to your motivations, but judge your fit in the alignment based on the products of your actions. Thus a lawful evil character is as likely to get many points towards the 'good' end of the spectrum as the lawful good character. The difference between the two comes down to why they acted that way. And thats ignoring the fact that most people see themselves as 'good' and there enemies as 'evil' making such judgements very subjective (a paladin slaughtering a village of goblin is an example of this paradox)

Personally I'm curious what the details are regarding the Druid. As the alignment system is out thus the whole neutral thing wont be in play, and without that a druid is just a preist of a nature, or animal god or nature itself. As a result I am very curious what druid means in this context. Shape changer maybe? Will be good to see.

Just mildly curious, by traditional values you mean people who prefer advanced dungeons and dragons edition 3 play styles oposed to adapting a more so many uses per combat adnd 4th edition style? Or is it more of a question of if armour class should go up or down as it gets better?

I don't think anybody wants to start a religious flamewar here. Plenty of other places to do that. No point in discussing real life faith. I think what the rest of the atheists have been getting at is that, since the gods are more than just faith in this universe, that not believing in them would make you willfully stupid, hence why an atheist affiliation in the game would be nonsensical. However, I do think an 'anti-theist' that chooses not to worship the gods would be possible. I agree, personally I have been trying to avoid discussing religion is anything but game terms (I think I failed to do that so twice; for that I apologise). As for the not believing in good being willfully stupid I have to defer to the late Christopher Hitchens (I really dont want to start a fight based on this; its just he said it best). When asked by if god did exist, and god returned and sat in judgement over Christopher how would he react. Christopher's response was to reply that he would demand to know by what right this being believed it had moral authority over him. Disbelief and even outright rejection in gods is not an alien concept for rpg worlds; from dragon lance, to the wheel of time, from conan, to cthulhu, from lord of the rings to narnia these questions are raised on all sides of the equation. I really feel that the world of eternity would be richer for not excluding this subject by the simple act of baking in a belief system to a given class while granting the others so much flexibility.

I don't want to get into a debate about this, as I'm pretty sure this will lead into territory best avoided on these forums. But suffice to say I disagree with you on this. Your reference to being able to challenge/defeat/kill the gods may not actually apply to this world. Perhaps they actually are gods in this setting and cannot be challenged or defeated by mere mortals. Given a setting in which gods are indisputably real beings, I cannot sea an atheist priest being a viable option. An anti-theist priest? Maybe, but what power would he have? What you describe about the character seems to me more like the Wizard class - even closer, a Sorcerer. Not a priest. Thank you I appreciate your concession and rush to the common ground that atheist priests could be possible. As for the abilities, I would suggest restoration and clairvoyance style spheres. Or to put it another way, heals, buffs, and disenchants. As for the wizard or sorcery options a wizard bases their abilities on intellect and incantations, has no physical martial ability and must learn spells, oh an usually is a dps character not a support character. A sorcerer bases their abilities on the force of personality, can cast any spell available, also has no physical martial ability and is also a pure dps character. A priest on the other hand bases their powers on a belief in an ethos, is granted spells by that belief, has martial ability and is fills a support role. But I'll leave it at that, as I'm happy to accept your agreement that such a role could exist in the world setting without pushing my luck.

And preists would have no powers and would shout that gods do right? Actually that would be pretty fun, a real twist; priests with no divine powers all all, rather charm based abilities based on there abilities to manipulate.

If anything it should be less of "Gods don't exist" and more like "All the gods are jerks and I refuse to worship any of them". Could be interesting to have a character like that. There's also the fact that just because this race is uber powerful doesn't mean it has to be accepted by all the lord of it's sphere of creation. Many could argue that the worship of these entities is akin to cargo cults we have here. Regardless of your real life beliefs these characters would be fun to roleplay that's for sure.

The game is set in a fictional world where the gods aren't fictional. True, so? We live is a non-fictional world where gods are fictional and we have theists right? So why not a fictional world where gods are non fictional and we have atheists? Just saying it would be nice.