Hormalakh

I didn't know those guys in the video were monks. I don't think I did a good job trying to convey my point. Here's another try. I'm going to give you some definitions. Give me one word that would describe these people. 1 A master in the art of fighting. Able to use swords and shields. As well as bows and arrows. Heavily built and able to withstand much damage. 2 An extremely devoted and zealous, often fanatical, soldier who has pledged himself/herself to a chosen cause. 3 While they are masters of combat, their recklessness, ferocity, and their predilection to substitute raw aggression for discipline is what describes them. 4 Also a master in the arts of fighting. These people have a predilection for not wearing any clothes and spouting philosophical nonsense right before they jump into battle. They also forecast their attacks with some sort of ridiculous name like "Flying kick-a-pow" (That was for you Osvir, due to your avatar, er...) 5. A spiritual master known for their devotion, discipline, and spirituality. They have forsaken this material world for a better understanding of the heavens and spiritual realm. While many are peaceful philosophers, some have established their philosophies into the fighting arts. 6. A master of the magical arts. They are able to change the physical world with words that nobody understands.

There may be other ways to award the player for killing large quantities of enemies. For example, there was a small detail that I really liked about the original Diablo (first game in the series). When you encounter an enemy of a certain type for the first time, you don't know anything about it. You mouse over it, and it just diplays the enemy's name. After killing a few of these enemies, you get some basic information like average hit points. By killing more of them, you eventually learn their resistances and weaknesses (i.e. vulnerable to fire, resists cold). Finally, after killing dozens of them, you get their full stats on mouse over. I wouldn't mind seeing something similar in Project Eternity. Maybe it becomes easier to get critical hits on enemies you've killed many times before.

"Really Conan? That was the 600th zombie you've killed since I left the adventurer's hall with you. You just cut his head off with one stroke. You really think that you learned something new by what amounts to you stretching your arms out a little?" Edit: Of course little old shrimpy here definitely learned a few things or two fighting what was his 20th or 30th zombie. He's still young, that chap.

This should help not putting 100.000.000 of bloody trash mobs in the game. And, as has been previously pointed out, murdering umptillion of gobbos helping you become more persuasive is equally retarded, because the system is only a abstraction of reality. How about being better at taking the specific enemy down? By taking down 15 Goblins you get +1 to "thaco" towards that specific creature. How about putting learn-by-doing TES style where it belongs... in the trash bin. Good point. I was just thinking about Final Fantasy II (which is the reversal of gaining experience from journeying, and it's utterly utterly utterly horrible. Although the story is great, it really suffers because of this). Now this isn't what I'm aiming for with my suggestion, TES in the trash bin. If you and I discussed for a while you'd find my weak points and strong points in terms of discussing, right? If I fought a Goblin a couple of times I would do the same, the first few times I might even lose and have to run away because I have no idea what the crap I'm facing, it's patterns and what it does, can it cast Magic? Is it a Shaman in the Goblin population? Things like that make the character's combat attitude grow. Read Vagabond, please. I wasn't sure was TES was, but now that I've read your description I think I understand it and I agree with you. Perhaps a challenge rating for each skill would determine the amount that skill increases if a certain method is used. For example, using a speech skill on someone who is easily influenced might gain you speech experience at lower levels of that skill, but as you get better, the experience becomes either negligible or non-existent. The challenge ratings of these speeches (you need higher skill points to succeed for example) would help determine whether you gain experience or not due to that particular action. Experienced thieves no longer gain lockpicking experience by locking and unlocking their own doors (the challenge rating is too low). They also don't gain experience by unlocking that flimsy lock. Diplomats no longer gain experience unless the discussion was a particularly difficult one. Fighters no longer gain experience unless the challenge rating was high enough.

And what prevents you from sneaking past enemies and getting the stealth bonus, then talking to them and getting the speech bonus and finally killing them and getting the combat bonus? It doesn't. But as in real-life the more I practice something, the better I become. As long as I keep my rewards limited to the skill that am practicing, the better I get at that. You don't get generalized experience points for doing those things, you get specific rewards. So if your PC is a jack-of-all-trades that's goign to be a really slow game (and maybe there can be a limit here too). But if you want to become an expert in something, then that is what you continue to practice.

Well I would think that in this world, killing creatures willy-nilly would be looked down upon (just as it is here in the real world). You would want good reasons to kill others. One is to save your own skin (unless you are a fighter and can take the heat) and another is to value the sanctity of life regardless if hobgoblin or orc.

This should help not putting 100.000.000 of bloody trash mobs in the game. And, as has been previously pointed out, murdering umptillion of gobbos helping you become more persuasive is equally retarded, because the system is only a abstraction of reality. How about being better at taking the specific enemy down? By taking down 15 Goblins you get +1 to "thaco" towards that specific creature. OH! That's AMAZING! Give "XP" that is used towards specific mechanics! Lockpicking more increases your lockpick skill. Speech skill increases your speech skill more. Combat increases THACO. Then XP can be used towards other things like unlocking PERKS and SKILLS.

I really liked the idea that killing a new type of monster should give you ever-shrinking amounts of XP. A few other things should give you XP like thievery, spellwriting, and other things as seen in IE games.

I too changed my vote to "Don't care." I loved in BG2 that I could write spells into my spellbook and gain some experience doing that. I'd try not to save-scumm because then it made spellwriting a tactical option for me.

Nah, that's not what the poll is about. I'm trying to measure support for Josh Sawyer's design philosophy specifically. I'm sure everybody here has his own set of compromises he's willing to make but that's not what I'm interested in. Sounds good. Carry on

Hey OP, can you change the poll a little. Add this option in, I'm interested in knowing what people think. 1FOR 2AGAINST 3. DEPENDS. Majority of XP quest-based. Minimal XP for using skills against enemies (killing, thievery, using spells, etc)

We can always throw out our ideas and see if any of them stick with the devs? When brainstorming ideas, 2 heads are always better than 1.

I think if the mechanic takes into account what class you are and actually awards you based on that class, then its quite robust. Fighters do get XP for killing, wizards for spells, etc. It's difficult to do right, but if done right, it would make a lot of sense. Perhaps an amalgamation of goal-based XP and much lesser amounts of XP for class-defined skills (fighting, spellery, thievery, monkery, priestery, etc-ery)

Nah. I'm For because I never ever play fighters in games. I figured if my players need to get XP they can all kill enemies regardless if they're fighters or thieves. But this time, if the mechanic is done right, then I'd actually have to play a fighter and gain XP through killing with a sword and shield. I wouldn't be able to use a wizard to do the same thing to get that XP.

What if you got experience for going to said dungeon level and reaching the point right past the hobgoblins. What difference should it make how you got to that point as long as you got it. Fighters will kill to get there, wizards might shove enemies out of the way to get there, diplomats will talk their way there, etc. They all had to struggle to get there.

I chose for. I think this will be the first time I've ever played a game as a fighter just so I could kill enemies for XP.

^ Possibly. But I think I beat the game. I never buy a game and not beat it. Never.

I think the way this mechanic is supposed to work is that your stamina is what most people would consider HP in other games, whereas your health is more a long term HP. Since the game is going to be permadeath (if on expert mode, maimed on normal), it doesn't make sense to make HP something that is fairly flimsy. I think it just makes for better realism and a better immersion.

N/T

I remember being frustrated with something specific about Arcanum. But I lost that gamedisk a long time ago. I'm thinking it had something to do with battles. There might have been bugs in it or something too. I still remember the music though. I loved that music.....Carry on.

A wizard is by definition one who uses magic. We are challenging the idea that a monk by definition is one who uses martial arts. I mean when you hear "that monk was amazing" you don't think "wow that monk really kicked the ever-living life out of that dude." You think "wow that dude must be really spiritual." With a wizard you think "Wow that guy used his/her magic like a beast." So let's try this: Wow! That ________ is amazing! Fighter - kicked the crap out of the guy with his sword or other weapon Wizard - Zapped him with a lightning bolt (magic) Chanter - I'm not really sure but maybe sang the dude to death? Priest - Used prayer magic on that mofo Barbarian - Basically ripped the guy to shreds with his hulk-like strength. Thief (Diplomat) - talked the dude out of a fight Thief (Assasin) - killed that dude without anyone finding out Thief (robber) - Stole that dudes money Cipher - Mind ****ed that dude. Ranger - Used that bow really well. Monk - ???? Used martial arts?

The one thing that I want most more than anything else in a dialog mechanic is that I am not told that a certain choice is because of my really high skill. I do not want to know that because my mechanical skill or my speech skill or my science skill has given me an option I wouldn't otherwise get. I really think that in older games and actually in F:NV this really ruins the whole point of trying to read through the different choices and make it your own choice as a player. If you know that of the 4 or 5 choices, one of them requires a speech of 100, you're going to try that. There's no more challenge. I would really hate this as an example: Enemy: So are we going to brawl or what? Option 1: No, please don't hurt me. Option 2: [speech 100] Why should we fight? This fantasy-setting has permadeath. Are you sure you want to risk your own life? Option 3: [Threaten 65] Prepare to die scum. Option 4: [science 45] The extremely brittle metal used in your sword will hae no effect on my magically enhanced plate-armor. I calculate a 55% chance of maiming yourself indefinitely with a standard deviationof 5% plus or minus 1 to 2%. Option 5: *unsheathes sword* Option 6. I am the terror that flaps in the night. Let's gt dangerous. If this might make the game more "difficult" for some players, I would absolutely LOVE to have this in the expert mode. Obviously, dialog choices that require speech "rolls" would still have the "roll" happening. I just don't want to know that it requires a speech roll. I might not have picked the better option if I didn't know that. It also forces players to really read George and Chris's excellent writing to make sure they are really picking the choice that they want. Let me know what you guys think about this.

How about thieves stealing souls? XD From what I understand in this world, stealing a soul would be the ultimate crime.

No backer number. Feargus said they're a little difficult to get.

I guess my biggest concern with the Rogue/Thief skill is to make the class skills robust and satisfying to use. For example, if there is a thieves' guild, only they should really be able to join the TG. In a lot of the older IE games, the thieves were modded just because they were unsatisfying to use other than as a lockpick and trap-hunter/setter. I guess my biggest concern is that with a lot of these classes, they should be quite robust and different than the other classes so that it isn't just fighter + (insert a few skill sets here) or wizard + fighter + etc...