Hormalakh

it's a very difficult thing to pin down, amentep. It's like that saying "Art is never finished, only abandoned." Polish cannot be measured or quantified in any realistic way, but ultimately it goes back to how long they can spend on re-iterating weaker aspects of the game, working on the beta, fixing bugs, and adding smaller side-quests. If you've ever played any of the older IE games, you'll notice that pretty much all of them have two mods: the fixpack, and the unfinished business packs. That money will likely go to making those mods less and less necessary by working on those aspects so that most of what they design will go into the game, and the game will "feel" satisfyingly finished and complete. Artwork will get that second (or third) paint over. More money means more time to work on the game. This can mean pushing back the deadline (as was what happened) or putting in more man-hours (more eyes to look at the game) befor the deadline.

it would be great to see how kaz does a portrait (maybe using one of the backer pictures) on a youtube video or something (speed draw) so modders can learn how to make good looking portraits.

wow...i can go for that Josh. That's a good way of doing it without having to get rid of "OP" spells like flesh to stone, disintigrate, PW:Kill, etc.

Just like in real-life, being a jew has its stigma.

I still think that even an artistic expression of "mounts" with bags in outworld maps would go a long way in "explaining" this concept of "bottomless packs." Different settings? Different mounts perhaps.

it's a ease-of-use tool. it's similar to other ease-of-use tools out there. the reason i thought it would be useful is because of the (admittedly few) posts i've read on the forums of players who wanted dice-roll stats as opposed to point-buy stats. those people argue for a "random" allocation of stats because they want "unique" characters. in terms of risk/reward, the rewards of this tool outweigh the risks. if they don't implement it, i'll probably mod it into the game when it comes out. i've also adjusted the algorithm based on your comment (thanks!) num points_available_for_buying_stats = X ##set to number of points available at beginning var last_stat_changed ##last stat that was changed Loop ## if points_avail_for_buying_stats > 0 ( RNG(-6,6) ## used to decide what each point is doing to buy/sell Case If: ## if not max, change stat by one point, add/reduce total points left by one, set last_stat_changed to last stat. ##positive cases, add one point RNG is 1 AND str/might < max, add 1 point to str/might. points_avail_for_buy_stats = points_avail_for_buy_stats - 1. last_stat_changed = str RNG = 2 AND int < max, add 1 point to int. points_avail_for_buy_stats = points_avail_for_buy_stats - 1. last_stat_changed = int RNG = 3 AND dex < max, add 1 point to dex. points_avail_for_buy_stats = points_avail_for_buy_stats - 1. last_stat_changed = dex ... RNG = 6 AND resolve < max, add 1 point to resolve. points_avail_for_buy_stats = points_avail_for_buy_stats - 1. last_stat_changed = resolve #negative cases, subtract one point RNG is -1 AND str/might > min, subtract 1 point to str/might. points_avail_for_buy_stats = points_avail_for_buy_stats + 1. last_stat_changed = str RNG = -2 AND int > min, subtract 1 point to int. points_avail_for_buy_stats = points_avail_for_buy_stats + 1. last_stat_changed = int RNG = -3 AND dex > min, subtract 1 point to dex. points_avail_for_buy_stats = points_avail_for_buy_stats + 1. last_stat_changed = dex ... RNG = -6 AND resolve > min, subtract 1 point to resolve. points_avail_for_buy_stats = points_avail_for_buy_stats + 1. last_stat_changed = resolve #zero case. add 2 points to last changed stat. This is to allow for more variability in stats. must check that points avail is at least 2 AND last_stat_change < max -1. RNG = 0 AND last_stat_changed < max-1, add 2 points to last_stat_changed. points_avail = points_avail -2 )

yeah, i think people would do this, if it wasn't a "feature." It's just one of those polishing things that's always nice, you know? not a huge deal IMO which is why i tried to come up with the code for it too - it's that simple.

Some people enjoy the randomization aspect of rolling stats (nobody is the same, etc) and so it would be nice to have a "randomly choose" button in the chargen taht allows you to randomly allocate the stat points. Algorithm: variable = points_available_for_buying_stats ##set to number of points available at beginning Loop ( ## if points_avail_for_buying_stats > 0 RNG(1,6) ## used to decide what each point is doing to buy Case If: RNG is 1, add 1 point to str/might. RNG = 2, add 1 point to int RNG = 3, add 1 point to dex ... RNG = 6, add 1 point to resolve. points_avail_for_buy_stats = points_avail_for_buy_stats - 1 ## reduce points left by one)

this was one of the things that they mentioned was an issue in the past and have been working on it for this game. we'll see what happens.

why do you fear the raccoon dog so, Karkarov?

Boy Brandon, you must HATE our resident punmaster, Lephys.

HAH! ARM! Next you're going to be telling us you're partnering with a publisher! Just kidding I love you guys. is the ghouls leg supposed to be so shaky? Poor girl, she can barely stand up. I want to just give her a chair and place it right next to my party. Learned a lot about animation when it comes to timing today. Thanks. Keep up the great work.

godlike chanter FTW want to see how the mechanics play on these guys.

You're thinking too narrowly Indira, what about a blast potion of speed? Or a polymorph juice potion where your enemies can transform into rats? Or a mass potion of invisbility where you throw it at your feet and anyone in the splash range gets "some invisibility" (improving AC for a short duration and characters becoming semi-transparent). What about a potion of sparks that you throw that will blind enemies (and allies) within the range? It's a great addition, in my opinion.OF course, I am OP, afterall. And I don't mean original poster. I mean oddly pretentious.

Very cool ideas Jarrakul! Those would be very interesting fights.

The equipment given to you in these expansions sometimes broke game mechanics that the developers intended - you have to rebalance the whole game for this, because you're unsure when players will tackle the expansion material. Secondly, it's not just the level cap that matters but WHEN you reach the level cap that matters. Putting in XP areas which can be tackled at any time, again, makes this difficult for developers to adjust the difficulty of the game. Uh... what? My mistake, I thought WK was not accessible from the TOB campaign, apparently it is. However, it is also accessible from the original campaign. Which brings me back to balancing the original game (as well as a story that doesn't really fit into the first one - The hero is killing demogorgon when he still doesn't have his soul yet? Shouldn't he be worrying about more important things?).

I now know how the devs feel when their words are misunderstood. You are the second person to misunderstand my point so perhaps this is a failure of communication on my part. I'm not advocating that Obsidian remove any of its current story to stick into the expansion. As far as I can tell, their story was finalized many months ago. However, my point is that there should be considerations made in the current game for a future expansion that has already been promised. As such, they should consider avenues to make sure that the story in the expansion isn't jarringly out of place from the main story they are telling from the main game. Many times, in storytelling, spin-off stories occur when the creators find a topic that they would have liked to explore further in the original - I would rather they make considerations for that NOW rather than later when the main game is already finalized. Again, I'm not advocating DLC-style expansions, taking bits out of the original game, or any other crazy notions. I'm advocating planning for the future expansion now to keep balance and story-telling in mind.

I don't think 5 or 6 lines of extra code for maybe a handful of colorful NPCs is out of scope. I'd say this fits within the core three golas that Obsidian is trying to achieve.

that's not what i said at all. did you even read it? I'm saying that if they are going to do "DLC-type" expansions, to make sure that it works with the story and with main plot game balance. I would they rather avoid the whole mid-game additions and put everything as an epilogue to the initial game, but they have to keep these things in mind when making the original game. every other previous IE game had what you call "DLC style stuff". I'm advocating that at the very least it should fit a complete playthrough.

I'm finishing up IWD1 here and one of the interesting bits in that game is the It woiuld be interesting if some of the harder bosses/demi-bosses/special characters had AI's that were completely different than the other monsters and these AIs matched their personalities. So that players who are paying attention to the story and that pick up on these things can use them to their advantage during battles. For example, maybe Marketh/Dirty Llew could target women in the party first and wouldn't attack men until all the women are killed. Or for example, since elves hate drow and vice versa, the elves/drow would first attack each other in addition to other considerations made during the battle. Maybe Malavon would attack gnomes in the party until they're all dead and then move on. I think this would definitely make the story more interesting, make paying attention to enemies' weaknesses/personalities more interesting, and make battles more interesting because of the strategy involved. AIs that have prejudices towards mages, women, races, cultures, etc would be very cool. This would make the mechanics match the story, and if you can avoid the loopholes that players will find (make the AI chase one character around only while the others shoot him down) this can be more enjoyable. What does everyone else think?

So after playing pretty miuch all the IE games (just finishing up IWD1, haven't done IWD2) the one thing that really irks me when it comes to the expansions is that they are jarringly out of place with the orignial game. 1- The expansions usually don't fit within the main story AT ALL and are rather just an additional story. When it comes to telling an interesting story for myself, I find that I'd rather just not play the expansion at all so that I can have a better story. This is true with BG1 and IWD1. BG2:TOB does a much better job of keeping wihtin the story. 2- I find that it's really tough to stick with the expansion and the game's balance goes all wonky after this. You're either too overleveled for the final fights of the main story when you get back to it, or you're too underleveled for the expansion. Again BG2:TOB avoids this (for the most part) by coming at the end of BG2. However, the other games have this issue and even BG2's Watcher's Keep does the same thing. IF you start WK too early, the rest of BGII's main story line become a joke and not at all challenging. But if you try to finish WK after killing irenicus, you can't. So how do you guys avoid this? 1- Fit the expansion within the story. Make you main story have a section where you expect a good time for the expansion to occur, then when you make the expansion, place it there so that it fits the story. 2- Make the expansion come directly after the story. But make the expansion unrelated to the main story, or at least make the expansion a "tying up loose strings" a la an epilogue. 3- If you are gong to make portions of your expansion fit within your main story, rebalance your entire main questline, keeping in mind that the balance is going to be completely out of whack with a person who is trying to play a completionist game. Or alternatively, make it an epilogue so that you don't have to worry about the balance of the main story. 4- Don't pull a watcher's keep, Durlog's Tower, etc for an otherwise good expansion. If you want to open up new locations, unlock them afte rthe main story is finished. Or if you are going to make them appear in the main story line, spend the extra week or two to rebalance the main story as well. Add a few monsters here and there and especially at the end game to account for the extra levels, experience, loot, spells. Maybe even give the final boss some of those spells that come in the expansion. For example, I'm pretty sure you guys are considering adding levels to the endless dungeon for the expansion. If you are going to do this, please lock that content out until the player finishes the main quest line. Maybe the party can find the key on one of the final bosses of the game in the main story that will unlock those levels in the endless dungeon. Please make considerations for your expansion now, when you still can make changes to the main game. Set up a spot in your story that doesn't jar with the main quest, and set up in-engine modification capabilities so that you can keep balance for expansions in mind.

I think he was asking if there would e any areas where you can't possibly have someone with enough skill to even use resources, but that you'd need to come back after your skills been upped.

I was wondering if this game would have any "throwing" weapons and whether throwing potions(grenades) is something the devs have considered. If so what sort of skill is this based off? Is it based off the same "throwing weapons" skill or part of athletics, etc? There should be a chance to miss with this, so I'm hoping throwing these "oils of fire" for example, wouldn't always hit. There are other sorts of "explosive potions" i can think of that can give both AoE damage as well as AoE support.

I probably agree, but aside from conversation and combat... what exactly would you say are these other mechanics/gameplay elements? i mentioned them before. exploration (content lock-out), crafting, puzzle solving, stronghold minigame. Semantics. It's the same thing as making a bunch of class-exclusive skills, like Perform for Bards in NWN. Ah, but you say "no, we're basically taking existing universal skills and chopping them up into class-exclusive skills, not creating new ones whole cloth!". Well, I'd say that's still almost as much work in terms of balancing and re-balancing. yeah. you're right infinitron. IS THAT WHAT YOU WANTED TO HEAR?! *SOB* actually hassat and i broke it down, and it seems that really, it's not a great idea when you sit and pan it out completely. so ... yeah there's that.

backing a game is not the same as liking a genre. there are a multitude of reasons why someone can't/won't back a game but still like the genre or the developer or the game. get out of here with your silly analogies. i liked the IE games (still can't get into IWD, but liked all the other ones nonetheless), but I have the same concern. I'm also a backer too. what other silly excuse are you guys going to throw out there instead of actually considering the question asked?