Jump to content
The Community Blog (An Invitation)

Doppelschwert

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1033

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Doppelschwert

  1. Doppelschwert
    I disagree. I think it adds some variation to the reward system. Part of the things I hated about NWN2 was the way all of your characters levelled up at exactly the same time. I always preferred 'Ooh! Xan has levelled up, how does that change the party mechanic?' as opposed to 'Oh, the entire party has levelled up. Guess the mechanics stay the same but we're a bit more tough.' Ymmv, but I would be deeply disappointed if all classes levelled up at the same time. I'm not sure if you're for different experience tables or for different level up moments or both. Personally, I'd like to see the same experience tables, and I'm pretty sure that this is what we will get. The reason for that is simply that josh makes a lot of effort into normalizing things, e.g. which would completely miss the point if you have different experience tables. I also don't see the rationale behind having different experience tables. Regarding the level up moments across party members, I'd prefer them to be spread out over a level so that you have a positive event every once in a while, but ultimatively I don't care and I guess that its way easier to balance with equal experience distribution. However, I hate it if only the party members that didn't fell unconscious gain experience, as the danger for certain classes to get knocked out are often unequal.
  2. Doppelschwert
    I think they said in an interview to the german gamestar magazine that they were aiming for something along the lines of lvl 12 for the PE campagin, where further add-ons and sequels would raise the cap. I think that they'll only plan the levels that are relevant to the game they are doing at the moment.
  3. Doppelschwert
    Thanks for the quotes. Now that I see them, I even recall having read them earlier. However, they are more vague in tone than sensukis post, so I guess reading some form of confirmation into his post made me surprised, as I only remembered that it wasn't decided as well. A system I'd like best would be having to choose between class specific talents on each level up where the talents are tied to your level before appearing in a pool of possible choices, similar to what josh describes. This way you don't need a general talent on top in order to have a choice and the power curve isn't overblown. Having different choices on level up would be fine by me as well, like having a repeating cycle of attribute bonus, general talent, class talent choice through the levels. I'd probably like every system as long as there is some choice on every level.
  4. Doppelschwert
    Huh, this is new to me. Do you happen to have any sources on this? I'm a bit dissapointed somehow. I thought that we'd be able to make an interesting choice in every level. A new class ability is surely a good thing in order to make leveling way more exciting than in DnD with its dead levels, but I had hoped for some customization at every level.
  5. Doppelschwert
    That depends on the punchline the joke will have
  6. Doppelschwert
    Thanks for commenting so fast on the feedback josh! Also, the scripted event looks absolutely fantastic and makes a cool addition to the game - somehow I skipped that on my first time reading through the update.
  7. Doppelschwert
    Although the UI seems nice, I think there are way to few icons for abilities, at least if the icons used here are supposed to reflect what should be accessible by icons in the real game (a button for defending, a button for every hand, a button for skills, a button for the spellbook, a button for abilities). There would only be 6 slots left for abilities - in 2014 I don't really want to click through submenus to access my spells like in IWD because I can't even display a spell for every spell level. If you leave it like that by the time the game ships, I'll be really mad at you. That is neither accessible nor acceptable. Sorry for the strong words, but I feel like more icons are less disturbing to the immersion than using time to switch menus during combat or accessing the spellbook in an extra window. Thats also one of the biggest flaw in the IE games, in my opinion at least - the nwn UI did much better regarding the displaying of abilities, although they weren't as nicely integrated into the visual style as they were in the IE games. But in a pinch, I'd always vote for accessibility over asthetics. Apart from that, everyting is nice and looks awesome. Keep up the good work!
  8. Doppelschwert
    I'm not arguing about removing the challenge but about making it work with the setting. All the above things you mentioned could be achieved with a curse as well, except the contagious part and the incubation period (whereas the later is debatable). If the setting has the medical skills of the middle ages - which it seems to have - I expect people to die from influenza or even a cold and I don't think it makes much sense for the party to shrug anything off after a good nights sleep. And as mentioned in my quote above, short term cures do not exist in the setting, so how would the party be able to cure a disease once they contracted it, without being inplausible to this setting? I just don't see it. So I think mechanic wise, the question is rather how we can have the mechanics described by you without breaking the setting and without being annoying. Apart from being contagious, I know of no quality of diseases that are exclusive compared to other methods of debuffing, so why should they be in the game as a mechanic despite being contradictory to the settings premise?
  9. Doppelschwert
    From Update 24, just as Gfted1 pointed out: I don't think diseases that you can contract during combat and which are easily curable afterwards work in this setting, so I'd rather not have them. I get sick in real life about 2-4 times a year, I don't draw additional "pleasure" from having to deal with sickness while playing games as well. Besides, magical debuffs can fill the same role, just as has been pointed out by PrimeJunta. But I also agree with him on having them as quest hook, which is really all I'd like them to be in this game.
  10. Doppelschwert
    Yes, I'm ok with backpack/inventory loot being part of this new system. What I meant was "equipped" items. Gear that you've placed on your body, i.e. dragged and dropped onto your paper doll. I think spells that reduce strength should still be able to encumber a character if they are "wearing" heavy gear. And indeed, if what you are wearing under normal circumstances is too heavy, then that should encumber a character too. Sawyer on his formspring: You will attack, cast spells, and perform most other actions (not including standard movement) more quickly. A character in the heaviest armor will likely have somewhere in the range of a 30% speed (again, not movement) penalty to his or her actions. In the time it takes an unarmored character to complete a given action 10 times, a character in the heaviest armor will have completed the same action 7 times (roughly). We are using this trade-off because it seems to pose a more interesting problem for players than a combat vs. non-combat trade (e.g. protection vs. carry weight or non-combat skill use) and it's not as mathematically straightforward as a damage avoidance vs. damage reduction model (i.e. dodging vs. absorbing hits). Characters that stay away from the front lines (e.g. traditional long-range wizards and archery-focused rangers) may tend to wear less armor because they are not subjected to as many attacks. Some front-line combatants may wear light armor with the strategy that dealing damage more quickly will make up for their relative lack of protection. However, that doesn't mean you can't have spells slowing people down.
  11. Doppelschwert
    Naw, you're just whining because you can't accept the truth. So, I may be a troll, but you are a whining idiot. I am looking for the link(s) now. Please be patient and don't **** your pants again. Right, like in the Zelda games for example. You just kept on killing everything like a moron (even though it was pointless) for phun. lol As a start, I don't like being called an idiot or a moron so I reported your post. Apart from that, I do kill enemies in zelda games when I feel like it, because if I wanted to play a game where I have to solve puzzles without ever having to fight enemies, I'd play an adventure instead. And if I'm tired of a dungeon, I still have the option to walk past enemies - thats the whole point, because its meaningless, I can freely decide whether I want to fight them or not. Rewarding exp for killing things, on the other hand, just punishes you for not being a murderous maniac. This is your opinion and that is fine. However, acting like this is the only way things should be is rather close-minded. Moreover, I don't see how basing exp on how wise a decision is is practical: Who gets to decide which course of action is the wisest thing to do? Me? The government? Common Sense? You? Either one option stands out as clearly better and the decision is meaningless or there are ties in efficiency. And if you want to have any element of uncertainty, you can't make any wise decisions: Because then there are instances where either you're rewarded for something that sounded like a wise decision but ended pretty bad in practice or the other way around. More to the point, decisions are not only about problem solving but also about defining the corresponding characters by the way they would be solving that particular problem. From a roleplaying point of view, many options over the course of the game would be out of character anyway and you'd be punishing players for playing a character they wanted to play consistently. Because you know, this is a RPG after all, just as you said it yourself. About your links, others have already stated that you only interpret them in a way thats serving your cause although many things are simply assumptions of yours.
  12. Doppelschwert
    If you want to make a point then its your job to search for the corresponding update, not ours. By now I'm pretty sure he's just a troll. He's making stuff up as he goes and is twisting every fact into supporting his case, no matter how ridiculous his exxaggeration gets. As if you'd be able to avoid most of the combat while the devs clearly stated on this forum that you won't be able to evade most of the combat but only parts of it. Also, complaining about different ways to play the game being rewarded equally just says that you're not fighting because its fun but only because you want the best reward, which is a pretty one-dimensional motivation to approach a game, at least imho. If fighting is fun, I'll fight even if the reward is smaller, because having fun is the whole damn point of playing a game.
  13. Doppelschwert
    Which version of DnD you find best propably boils down to the first edition you played, easy as that. I started with DnD 3.5 and I like that system alot better than the versions before and after. This also implies that I don't think that BG2 had the best combat system ever. In fact, I didn't like the combat system at all. Why? Because there is almost no customisation involved. You pick race, class and attributes and thats pretty much it for the rest of the game. Whats the difference between my fighter and your fighter? Maybe some attribute points and the favored weapon, but thats it. I find that lacking. Also, mage fights were tedious and boring as hell. So whats my point? Even if they did something similar to BG2 with their combat system (which they don't), you wouldn't see me making threads about threats about not buying the game. Because there are different opinions - they are all valid, I can respect that and thats fine. Arguing that things are wrong the way they could be without knowing how they will be or attacking devs personal taste is just immature.
  14. Doppelschwert
    Right. When Josh says he hardly likes anything about Baldur's Gate he of course meant that he likes most of it. Sure. lol. Thats quite a binary world you're living in where someone can only like or hate something. You know, there are some nuances between hating and liking. Like "not liking" something for example. Right. After playing a loving Skyrim so much he has just suddenly realised that Baldur's Gate 2 was actually a really good game after hating it all those years. Sure. lol Again, he didn't hate it and even if he still doesn't like it that doesn't matter anyway. Most of his influence consists of gameplay elements which are the only thing he didn't mention in that interview anyway. Right. The IE games are considered to be some of the best RPGs ever created. So now we must completely change them. Sure. lol By the way: That has never gone wrong, ever. Never ever, ever, ever. Right? hehe It's way easier to dismiss everything by vastly exagerating the argument of the opposing party and saying "sure, lol" instead of arguing the actual statements... Although the IE games heavily featured combat, there was way more to them that gave them the reputation they enjoy today, and most of the things are independent of mr. sawyer. More to the point, we don't know anything about most parts of the game so its totally nuts to say they completely change the games. And I'd still argue that combat in BG2 wasn't the greatest thing ever. Thats a personal preference and expecting everyone on the development team to feel the same way about everything just doesn't work. Also, that would kill creativity pretty fast. Want a BG2 clone? Go play a mod. Besides, I don't get what you want to achieve with your whining? If I was mr. sawyer and were remotely in charge for all the things you assume he would be, you'd propably be the last person in this forum I'd be making a concession for giving the immature way you're acting.
  15. Doppelschwert
    And well deserved it is
  16. Doppelschwert
    Not only critical hits. 50% Damage Penalty means: 0.5*Attack-DT=Damage whereas 100% additional DT means Attack-2*DT=2*(0.5*Attack-DT)=2*Damage. I agree that this would be better if we left the old system. However, I think It might be better to use the old one with labelled indicators how good weapons are, as others are suggesting.
  17. Doppelschwert
    I'll propably make a run where I'll teach everyone in the party to beat people up with their hands. Thats going to be awesome.
  18. Doppelschwert
    I'd imagine the ability to make fists act like slashing damage would be awesome. This is already the best game ever, regardless whether slashing fists ends up in the game or not.
  19. Doppelschwert
    I think the mortification of flesh is fine and is translated in a meaningful and original way into a mechanic, I just don't like the name for it. For example, I feel like even the word pain sounds way better in this context. A wound is something your body suffers, while pain has more to do with willpower.
  20. Doppelschwert
    Yay for my swords-monk. However, I think "wound" sounds odd as the name for the ressource they are using, especially if I translate it into my own language. I don't think it needs a spiritual name like karma or chi, but I'd appreciate it if the name would be reconsidered, maybe giving it a more neutral sound.
  21. Doppelschwert
    Just for the sake of making the pun: I'm not digging this. Just makes me feel like missing something because I can't be bothered running around searching for stuff that most of the time isn't there anyway. And if it was more common to find something, you'd be stupid not to dig every inch of ground, which makes it busywork. Is that fun? Hardly. ... Now that I think about it, its busy work either way. So no, thanks.
  22. Doppelschwert
    Thanks for being so nice and answering all those questions. The way you describe weapon specialization to work seems adequate for me. I agree that making weapon choices not matter anymore after a certain point is not a good idea, but partially neglecting the penalty for using them at the wrong time is all I'd asked for anway.
  23. Doppelschwert
    I think Mr. Sawyer deserves a raise Thats a good compromise and an easy to understand system, well done. Although I'm interested, speaking of the damage reduction from armor: Are there any plans to introduce feats or the like to diminish the effects of armor vs weapons? So when I'm a really skilled swordsman and have invested a lot of character ressources into mastering the sword, will it be more effective against the various heavier armor types it wouldn't be effective otherwise? Or are weapons supposed to behave the same way against the respective armor types throughout the game? I'm asking because I don't like to change my weapon a lot during/before combat. Its ok to have penalties, but I think I should be able to avoid it if I'm dedicated enough to spend my characters ressources on this.
  24. Doppelschwert
    And this is totally fine, but that is a different statement than saying only men can be paladin or only women can be priests, while the player is in the special position to create just that one character which defies the rules. Thats fine too, theoretically, but how would you want to achieve this? If the npc just called you out on your class, that makes no sense. Just as you're asking, how would they know? If you have to give that information yourself to the npc, why shouldn't everyone be able to? Why wouldn't a rogue be able to pretend to be a priest or the like? You could as well link it to a background feat and / or being member in a faction, which makes much more sense from a roleplaying point of view. So I still don't see the benefit in having this. And I may have misunderstood you, but your suggestion sounded heavily like the former to me, and being called out on your class without having a choice would not fit a rpg with generic characters imo (while it works fine in stories where the protagonist has a given class and personality). Also, I don't see how this should be a "global" feature (again, you make it sound like that): Certain cultures liking / disliking certain gender/class combos is perfectly fine, but the whole world treating you differently for what you do seems way too biased to me.
  25. Doppelschwert
    ? Amentep correct xD my bad. Thanks Again, this is like saying: "No way are axes the only weapons in the game - everyone has the choice to use a sword! However, don't mind the -10 to hit on the swords." Why should anyone choose swords over axes if it makes the game harder without any justification? Its just a penalty. So no, they are not exclusive per se. But there is a "lore penalty" attributed to playing them with the "wrong" gender, which effectively is the same as saying: "Play them with their respective gender or suffer the consequences!" Your compensation is an interesting lore, but if I want to play my character differently, I just have to suffer the consequences without any benefits. Which sucks. My point is that this is a restriction in having a choice about how I want to play that class and that I don't see how this adds anything to the game which couldn't be accomplished in a better way by having a background feat at character creation - which at the same time could benefit a much broader class of characters.
×
×
  • Create New...