Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by elminster

  1. OK, to the poll: that was clearly not the intention. I thought you could that answer the first question only. Is it technically possible to change that? To the arrows: maybe I m mistaken there. Its just that I think that "normal" arrows / bolts are the standard weapon for most archers who use bows / crossbows. There are other types of ammo like heavy bodkin arrows but to represent them to much would be like a bias of arrow use. Just my 2 cents to that.
  2. Armor. In the latest update, update 36 (http://forums.obsidi...omes-but-first/), the armor system was announced. It consists of three types of damage: slashing, piercing and crushing weapons. Slashing works best against unarmored enemies, crushing is best against heavy armor. Piercing weapons can be used as a trade-off of both. In the past I asked in a poll what you think of wizards wearing armor (http://forums.obsidi...-wearing-armor/) The question now is: What do you think about the new armor system? Do you like it or do you fear that it doesnt work „in the long run“? Please take part in the poll to help PE earlily to make progress in this regard.
  3. Feargus said in the comments that they'll consider adding both approaches. They promished crafting.But they can still define what type(s) of crafting and what items each type does.Even in the kickstarter comments BG2 crafting was requested more than once.I think the more popular option will be the third in the poll,where both types exist,but with different uses.Plus is more easy fot the developers to balance I think in the same way. Legendary crafts which are possible in every playthrough (like in BG 2) could be limited to some sort of items f.e. armor and weapons. Other crafts which depend on randomly found items could be possible just for boots, shields and gloves f.e.I would also like that they are some kind of items which cant be crafted like f.e. rings and necklaces.
  4. First of all, I played Watchers Keep too - and I was disappointed as well. That was after I completed Baldurs Gate II - Shadows of Amn, an epic RPG with fantastic atmosphere, great story and lots of great skills (or, to specify it for the wizard, spells). You simply have to take into consideration that to critize Watcher's Keep this way is only possible at a very high level. The quests may be a bit boring and monotone, but dont forget: it was a dungeon from an add-on (!) which should complete the Baldurs Gate saga. It could be skipped which you could see already on the possibility to play trough it in BG 2 - SoA. If you want a fifteen (15!) level dungeon, the Endless Paths, to be better than the third-long Watcher's Keep, you are dreaming! Consider the Endless Paths just as bonus to the game, as it was Watchers Keep in the BG 2 add-on. And in particular, I would have nothing against several "boring" figths in the EP, as there were some in WK as well (vs. dragon, demons, etc.), maybe just a bit more challenging ones (consider the Giant they mentioned!). And finally, there is one thing I liked about Watchers Keep. It was the card game with the cambion, Aesgaeth. P.S.: no need to post 3 times, dude. It doesnt increase the replys
  5. I could arrange with the Arcanum system as with the BG system, the NWN system is just too boring. Of course I hope it gets as good as in BG 2 even its a different system.
  6. Hmm I would call myself pacifist in the "real world". And maybe I even dislike strategic war games with tanks etc. Nevertheless, I want play P.E. with a wizard who slaughts his enemy by his will - yes thats just a game and I have fun with that. But I can see your point and hope there will be lots of quests that can be solved alternatevily peaceful.
  7. I dislike armor use skill because it's a bit like a shoe use skill. Some other solution would be preferable. I agree with this. Only "real" skills. No checking for 1353 different skills every 5 minutes in the game please.
  8. Or that heats metal to 10,000 degrees. These spells wouldn't be against wizards who wear armor, though, they'd apply against EVERYBODY who wears heavier armor. Which is as it should be. You don't need to give casters a special penalty for wearing armor in order to encourage them toward robes. For instance, my Arcane Warrior in Dragon Age wore the Reaper's Vestments (robes) even though she could wear armor because with them she could get a 62 armor rating whereas wearing actual armor left her 12 points shy of that. No joke. What you do is make it so that the benefits of heavy armor apply more to melee classes than to casters, and the detriments don't hurt most melee types too much but DO hurt casters. How to do this? Lots of ways. Here's one: armor reduces your ability to avoid being tripped or knocked down and it takes you substantially longer to get back up again after you've been tripped. Presumably the fightery classes will have the mighty strength or dexterity to avoid getting tripped, but a caster wearing heavy armor and getting up in melee will spend most of their time flat on their ass, defenseless and unable to contribute to the fight. Here's another: heavier armor reduces your ability to dodge attacks, and most of the attacks that will be directed at range are the type you can dodge better than are absorbed by armor. Anything short of full plate armor won't protect you much against arrows or crossbow bolts. Here's a third: certain damage types do MORE damage if you're wearing heavier armor. Lightning bolt, anyone? Or they could make it that someone wearing heavier armor takes a lot more damage but absorbs the bolt so it doesn't continue on its path. This would be a great thing for fightery types with lots of health/stamina, but your caster may want to avoid this situation like the plague. Here's a fourth: all the really awesome suits that increase your spell abilities are robes. Sure, you can wear armor, but all you're getting out of it is a slightly higher AC, while the other dude who's NOT wearing armor is doing half again as much damage AND regaining mana every time he gets hit. I like your first way. That is something very intuitive which imho should be implemented. The second is the common way I think. I fear that wizards get a bit to powerful by that (imagine something like a spell is disrupted when hit). It might work with applied benefits you suggest which I dont like. The third is common as well. The question if it is implemented: Is it the only way armors differ from? The forth with the robes is not intuitive and reminds me on Diablo (1-3). Im quiet sure its not working in a not very-combat-oriented rpg. The reasons are the mana you mentioned and the increased damage for all spells. Creating many spells will be difficult then. And I loved the huge number of spells in Baldurs Gate 1&2 and wouldnt like to miss this for pe.
  9. 2 thoughts about that: First, even if wearing armor doesnt make you immortal it has some effect to wear a different armor. Consider every class could wear the best armor in the game - a bit lame dont you think? You need then an armor system that effects the armor choice. That means an armor system with several best armor - for robes, leather armor, scale, chain... etc. Second, your thoughts about bullets. I agree with this but: as obsidian talked about powder weapons they said something they have a long reload time and are inaccurate. They talked about it as these weapons are part of the game but only to be chosen from few players (because of its characteristics). So you dont put on an armor just to be able to fight 10 percent of your enemies do you?
  10. Hmm I think we should let it to Lucasfilm (now Disney) to design a jedi. I regret that I cant edit my poll anymore to correct the errors and make it a bit more representative. I like the comment on Elder Scrolls Oblivion. Imho having all options only works if you get some penaltys. And this with all options is I imagine difficult to implement.
  11. OK, I admit that it is grammatically incorrect and of course it is incomplete - which based most on the fact I wrote it at something like 3 am. I was tired, but wanted to post it just to start a discussion about armor-wearing wizards. Which went exactly the way I wanted. Honestly, the reason they (Obsidian) are dealing with this topic doesnt mean we cant talk about this I tried to give an overview about the whole wizard armor discussion as good as I could - which doesnt mean you can do it better by posting your own poll.
  12. From update #29: We would like our armor system to accomplish the following goals: ... disassociate armor value from class type in favor of different build types. E.g. a wizard can wear heavy armor and be a different type of wizard instead of just "a wizard who is bad". So, that is a definite statement for the game mechanics (as it was announced earlier several times). For me its a essential one as it produces imho the biggest armor problem - how to combine wizards and armor? I feel that the best solution for this system is to have different armor types result in different bonusses. That also corresponds with the real choice goal. I assume they are Padded, Leather, Studded Leather, Hide, Scale, Chain, Splint, Plate (Tier 2), Field Plate (Tier 3), Full Plate (Tier 4) (also mentioned in update #29) The bonusses could be ... almost everything! So please write and comment what you think about this idea. Below are some possible boni for the armor types in the game. So here comes the bonus section: Padded (10-20%) resistance vs. blunt weapons. (20-40%) resistance vs. cold or electricity Leather / Studded Leather gives (20-40%) bonus to hide in shadows improves charisma (10-20%) Hide gives bonusses corresponding to animal origin of the hide: wolf: (10-20%) faster attack speed bear: (20-20%) higher strength/damage tiger: (10-30%) higher movement speed ... Scale (10-30)% chance to miss when attacked by daggers / swords and arrows Chain (10-20)% damage resistance vs. all weapons Split (15-40)% damage resistance vs. missile weapons Plate (20-30)% damage resistance vs. melee weapons BUT decreases agility by (5-10 %) Field Plate (30-40)% damage resistance vs. melee weapons BUT decreases agility by (15-20 %) Full Plate (30-40)% damage resistance vs. all weapons BUT decreases agility by (5-10 %) HIGH STRENGTH NEEDED
  13. Ok I loved BG 1 & 2 and think that they are the best isometric games you could play. Everything said.
  14. For me, the player house was already ok. Building a stronghold is quiet challenging I suppose. First of all, you have lots of great ideas about something like that - costumized quests, costumize looking, costumize achievments. But the point of costumizing is very difficult in that regard. If you want costumization, you want probably a proper one. So lets say: a mage tower for a mage, a fortress for a figther, a temple for a priest, a lair for a roque etc. Thats up to 11(!) different, most probably greatly time-costing pictures if done for each class. And for each one you want probably costumized furniture. Keep in mind that the stronghold was something for 200k money (2.8 to 3.0). Thats much, but not a huge lot. So I suspect there will be just a huge building / fortress which looking you cant costumize. Then you want to costumize the furniture. You can choose to build a library, a room for praying, a forge for crafting, a roque training room maybe, a chanting room for chanters.... Ok now think that each room buffs only one class. Having just one room makes the stronghold look empty. Having all leads to the question: why do I have to build it separately? I could have my stronghold startet with that already. That makes the last possible option, the stronghold is part of interesting, main-story influencing quests, most probable. But if its main-story influencing, can it even be a bit individual? Im actually quiet interested how they want to solve this without that its something like in BG 2 - not individual at all, using maps you already explored doing quests and adding just 2-3 mini-quests. Call me a pessimist but I see that coming...
  15. Maybe its not a problem to gain no experience points from figthing if we have a countless number of quests. You should also think of an evil character who doesnt want to do all "noble" quests. I dont expect that there will be so many evil quests, so what if you murder all god powerful characters and dont get a reward (since much of them tend to have no loot). And what about random enemies encountering when resting outside or traveling? Come on, that was quiet nice and should be an option. I cant see a possible quest in this direction. I also think figthing is at least sometimes much more difficult (against a dragon such as mentioned above) and should give you more experience than the peaceful option (think of BG 2: not a single dragon you had to figth, but nice experience (22k) for killing one).
  16. Yes, I like it very much. I havent used in Baldurs Gate 2 a single ressurection spell because I hated the idea (and I played the game more than 30 times).
  17. Most important: first establish all 11 (!) classes in a more or less balanced way: There are 5 physically figthing classes (figther, barbarian, monk, paladin, ranger), 4 spellcasting classes (priest, druid, wizard, chanter), and the rogue and the cipher. I would allow only dualclassing between different groups, so allow f.e. barbarian/priest but not priest/wizard (I hate even the idea that this would go). If the cipher is dualclassing available depends on the realized class. Priest/rogue not allowed (no thief can be a priest) If we include the cipher that means 37 dualclasses, 43 tripleclasses and 15 fourthclasses - 106 possibilities total It would be fine if about half of them, lets say 50 possibilities could be technically realised. I'd like to try monk/mage if its realized (yes it could be overpowered like the kensai). Just let the exp / lvl be about linear - if not you risk that playing dualclass is almost xpfree when leveling one class only weakly. A special exp gap just for being multiclassing would be fine as well. It could be exp for about 2 levels.
  18. OK, let's have some enemy bosses being lichs. I liked them in BG 2 even if I think Kangaxx was not the strongest enemy. But as a playable race? I think some highlevel abilities are difficult to implement. Leveldraining? Often leads to overpowering. Immunity to magic: the same. In which way would undead gain power? Maybe other immunities. Soulmanipulation is already part of the ciphers... for me thats enough.
  19. Just Genies with Wish-Spells like in good old Baldurs Gate 2 shouldnt be hard being implemented and very funny.
  20. My meaning was that "When you first play the game there are no such thing as "overpowerd" So at least one thing NWN1 was better then BG, Enemys USED magical shields often. And in NWN ther where spells that allways block some other spells espesialy "Magic missile" almost every magic def spell protected form this spell. Some enemys where even completly resistant to some kinds of demage example "Some spells giving 100% resistans on fire damege for some time". If you played NWN you whould see haw "Slots" system was frustraiting in this game. Somtimes it was imposible for mage to win a battle at frist time and it push you to reload spawning the same like rest spawning. Becouse you encouter enemy of 100% resistence of fire and you only have Fire based demage spells, YOU KNEW the ice demage or tunder damage spell that will affect him but you can't use it becouse you suck only fire damage spell and can't change to other in my opinion this was kind of dump... The "Slots" system only works for priests becouce they take energy from their gods so it's reasonable and they don't base their whole atack on magic, priest magic buffs and heal only in some cases are damage-dealers so it works. But not for mages who is fully concentated on magic and many times damage-dealing magic ... No need to be impressed - just to much time (I'm a student) That with NWN1 is interesting. As enemies used magical shields often they seem to be a bit more intelligent than in BG2. I have bougth the game but its standing in my bookshelf for several years now...the fact thats not isometric but 3d scared me a bit. maybe I'll give it a try now. Fire damage was most common magic in BG 2 as well but only some enemies were immun to it (mostly fire elementals I think, in the expansion fire giants). Hmm I liked the slot system but I think the way they are going to implement it (just a limited number of spell from each grade -> cooldowns) sounds ok. Actually you could trick enemy mages quiet easy in the slot system. You just had to go into range of a mage with magic protections and wait until he has cast (almost) all of his spells (of course this did not work if the mage could dispell your protections which was not very often), quiet possible with lvl. 5 spell protection from a magic school and lvl. 6 protection from magic energy.
  21. Yes, that is something I also thought of - not a completely new, otherway unexplorabable area, but some kind of nice, little scene / encounter you wouldnt experience on lower difficulties. That could be an ingame scene with migthy characters of the world (they meet you or they meet each other), or maybe a bit longer video sequence. Nothing more I would expect.
  22. Ok, its with cooldowns and grimoires - http://forums.obsidi...-with-tim-cain/ . Not exactly like in BG 2, but interesting and should make some sense. I'd like to see more details for grimoires. Maybe no cooldowns in highest game difficulty (hopefully)?!
  23. So you want mages to start around level 7 and have access to party members at the very beginning of the game, contrary to Obsidian's current plans? The BG2 approach worked for BG2, especially since dual classing a human mage gave cheap access to fighter abilities, but class design inevitably limits content design. If you want the protagonist to start out alone--or face specific challenges alone--every class has to be able to handle those challenges successfully. I can't see the sorts of challenges that can be handled solo by a mage with one magic missile (or friends spell) per day being very interesting for classes that don't share the limitations you want to place on mages. I dont think you have to start the game completely alone. I think its like in BG 1 oder BG 2 where u could recruit some compagnions at the beginning. Mages should be weak at the beginning and strong at the end (also to protect it a bit from being overpowered as dualclass). Of course you need some company in the beginning. And you should learn the true power of the low level spells which exists in some circumstances even for lvl.1 spells. If u examine better spells later on, u'll realize how migthy a mage is already when casting lvl.6 spells at BG 2 f.e..
  • Create New...