Hormalakh

I'm glad so many of you are taking up my question because I think that we're all hitting on pretty much the same thing: namely, defining a class isn't as easy as it seems and that a lot of implementations of classes has been done poorly in the past. And voila. I have found out why I hate the monk class just as much as I dislike the barbarian class. They've worked these classes into the game backwards. Instead of taking a broad approach of "what kind of job would be important in an adventurer's field?" and creating characters from that broad class, we've started to take specific characters and stretch them to fill entire roles. This is the same thing that has occurred with the monk. We've taken a very specific cultural application of a fighter and tried to stretch that role to fill in another complete role. It looks misshappen in our newly-created world. I know it's probably too late to propose this, but I really wished that the devs would take another look at these "vague" classes (barbarian, monk, ranger) and think about them some more and "rework" them (and maybe give them new names if needed). Then we have the somewhat-vague-but-better-sketched-out classes (druid, paladin, chanter) of which they're already - it seems - looked at one of them (the chanter) and made a few changes. And finally the "core-four-type" classes which are extremely broad and can have a variety of characters playing them (wizard, priest, fighter, rogue, and cipher) which really haven't ever needed any changes. Thank you guys for the very well-thought out comments! Keep them coming. They've been able to articulate points which I have been thinking but just haven't found the best way to say. Edit: That blog post was a great read mokona and I think the same criticisms work for the monk too.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned and has to do with video game based dungeons is telling the story of the dungeon through the art, loot, enemies. You don't need to hit the players over the head with what the history of the dungeon with a long drawn out exposition given by some guy who knows all there is to know about the dungeon. A lot of times, the way the dungeon is designed and the things that are shown tell a lot of the history of the dungeon, its beginnings, etc. I find that to be much more engaging than a long dialogue from the quest-giver. Generally, this usually isn't a problem for many dungeons, but I have seen a few terrible examples in the past and thought it was worth mentioning.

^ Or gremlins!

I like the idea of having racism in the game, but for Aumaua I meant more that I wanted them to actually have a violent, warlike culture which resulted in such a perception, rather than just being discriminated against due to their appearance. But if thats not the case, I suppose can content myself with playing a human or dwarf who just happens to also be an insufferable ****. Well, the primitive war-like culture might make them hated. Or perhaps it might be the "propaganda" usd by other races against them. "They're evil, bloodthirsty terrorists! Stay away!" Even though they really aren't, and are just trying their best to protect their homes from invasion.

Now that I think of it, I vaguely remember a sequence with Branwen and Xan in BG2. Was that by any chance the tutorial or am I hallucinating again? You really gotta lay off the weed. But yeah...Brandwen/Xan are in BG2's tutorial.

I don't think we'll have a "hated" race. Even orcs aren't hated by other orcs and "evil/lower-creatures. It doesn't make much sense to have one race take all the hate. I'd rather dwarves be hated on in specific places, humans, elves, orlans, and aumaua in other places, etc. Each one gets the "love"

YEah I'm not big into merchants in dungeons. You should go to a fight prepared, or be prepared to die.

^ Yeah. Especially if magic casters can also do melee damage (which is proving very likely). If wizards/priests/druids/ciphers/chanters can cast magic and fight with weapons, why would I want a regular fighter? What is he bringing to the table other than "can use melee weapons"? I think once they can figure out good legitimate reasons to be able to distinguish a fighter from a monk, paladin, barbarian and give viable reasons for why you would choose one over the other, then we're starting to get somewhere. I want fighters to be an actual viable option with abilities that other classes wouldn't provide.

The question then becomes where do we draw the lines betweeen the 9 classes? What distinguishes them? If they are mixes of these "skills" are all skills learnable by all classes? Do certain classes get "perks" for skills? Do they get special abilities that other classes don't? How can we make all the classes balanced so that each class is a viable choice? I know that we don't have everything set in stone in terms of classes: all we have are vague descriptions, but can you come up with your distinguishing abilities/skillsets that distinguishes them? So you're saying combat skills and non-combat skills don't define a class, but rather "class-specific skills" define them. Can you come up with 9 different skills that you think would do this? I'm assuming all classes can then advance down whichever combat and non-combat skills that they wish. Am I incorrect? i'm guessing this is similar to what Osvir said. Can you think of 9 different abilities that would distinguish the classes though? I like this idea. I'm not really clear on what you mean. What exactly are these progression metrics though? So do some classes get attack bonuses and others do not? Do some classes get more HP than others? Can you expand on this?

What do you guys think about classes from a games mechanics perspective? Should classes define very rigid borders between what a certain person can and can't do? For example, are rogues the only ones who can emply skills like pickpocket? Are monks the only ones who can fight unarmed? Are wizards the only ones who can employ spirit-based magic? Or are these classes undefined boundaries? Can a monk also learn some magic as well as thieving skills? Can a wizard also learn some ranger attributes? Can a barbarian also be partially a priest? If there are undefined boundaries, how undefined do we make it? Are some skills or attributes extremely rigid (priest spells ONLY for priests) and others unbounded (thieiving skills can be learned by any class) or is everything rigid/unbounded? These boundaries help players and the game world to be more/less rigid and help define our experiences. Thank you everyone for responding thus far.

I saw this article linked from another post and I really liked it and I thought it was good enough for even the designers to read. I have noticed that a lot of dungeons are really "simple" and this article talks about how to make your dungeons more organic and interesting. This is especially true with cave and sewer-type dungeons. http://thealexandria...ing-the-dungeon Anybody else have some good tips and ideas that have made your DMing experiences more fun? Anything you've seen other people do that has made your gaming experiences more fun?

I believe you need to contact Farudan.

The other problem that I haven't noticed anyone make is that if NPCs level up without you being there, they will be picking skills and other level up "feats" without your input, sometimes picking things that you wouldn't want. This happens in Arcanum where your NPCs level up their own stats without your input and can sometimes lead to annoying decisions where it wasn't the reason why you chose them as a companion in the first place. Too many fighters' skills not enough healing; too many pickpockets, not enough locksmiths, etc.

Nope never watched the mighty ducks. YEah I don't really like the bird-people either, but it would be nice to take features found on other animals and make them the distinguishing feature of a race, just like we do with elves(physique,ears) and dwarves(stature,beard) and orlan(ears,stature).

In my opinion, the tutorial as well as cutscenes should follow a few points: 1- It should be skippable. There should be a button that says skip; a spacebar shouldn't skip the cutscene as people who accidentally hit the spacebar or any other key would be quite upset to miss a certain part of the game. Skipping a cutscene as well as a tutorial should be purposeful. 2- Tutorials do not have to be a big chunk all the way at the beginning of the game. If there is a mechanic that comes in later in the game, then allow us to learn that technique later. Once again, skip the tutorial, if you want to either figure it out yourself or you've seen it before. Same with cutscenes. A lot of times, cutscenes are "rewards" to the players for having accomplished something. Keep them short, make them a useful and purposeful narrative mechanic. Don't go overboard. Make them skippable. http://penny-arcade....isode/cutscenes http://penny-arcade....e/tutorials-101

Eh.... honestly, you could put the restrictions down yourself and not reload more than X number of times. Even Ironman I think is a waste of time, but "continues" could be done by self-restriction. It doesn't really add anything to the game.

there is no resurrection in this game (permadeath) and healing science is poor.

^what... Look sewers are great and all. We just wanted to see a few other possibilities for dungeons.

They're ultimately trying to take the genre to a new level. It's jut nobody is willing to risk that first, very risky step. Edit: Oh and nobody wants to buy those kinds of games.

I like different motions for the spells.

See Vailians....

That's because Sigil is an actual part of the Forgotten Realms universe.

Yeah. I really hate obnoxious easter eggs. Don't make the game ridiculous.

In terms of repercussions, why not have several different ones. 1) Single individual gets hostile and attacks you. You either kill him or run away. If you kill him in front of a guard, the guards attack you. If they hit you in front of guard, the guards attack you. J/K If he hits you in front of guard, guards attack him. 2) Individual finds guard to tell on you. If he finds guard, guards attack you. 3) Individual "protects" himself (you are no longer able to succeed in pickpocketing.) 4) Individual runs away. 5) Individual steals back what you stole from him.

... forests, ships, islands, gladiatorial arenas, lost dwarven cities, run-down bazaars, an actual dungeon (underneath a castle), being shrunken in size and traversing a single room ...