TRX850

Valsuelm and cyberarmy, I feel your pain. Maybe we need a separate forum for RPGers to share their stories of memorabilia heartache? And when we have enough people, in a tavern, drowning their sorrows by the fireplace, it might spark up a new adventure. An epic quest to reclaim those tomes of old! Baldric...fetch my armoured codpiece. We set forth at once!

Examples?

I still have all my original D&D boxed sets too. Basic (Red), Expert (Blue), Companion (Green), and Master (Black). Back then, elves, dwarves and halflings were counted as classes. <nostalgic sigh>

As was discussed a few times in the other threads, the goal probably won't be to have equal opportunities for XP for all play styles for all quest objectives, but focus on providing well designed encounters and quests that over the entire campaign provide about equal numbers of opportunities for different play styles. Per-encounter or per-objective would just be way too messy and bad design for all play styles, rather than a memorable design for one particular play style.

What if your armour and weapons could suffer from "fatigue"? It's not actual fatigue, but a state it enters after taking enough physical damage. It may not coincide with when your party is fatigued and needs to rest, but if abstract repairwork is something that can be done around the campfire or at an inn while resting, then it shouldn't be any more of a hassle than regular character fatigue.

The real artistry in game design is in providing the illusion that the player is in control. Whereas in reality, the game designers have anticipated the vast majority of player choices, including the weird stuff, and provided an outcome for each of them. If P:E relies heavily on quest xp, they should still allow combat xp so that if someone does want to divert from a quest, or abandon it, or go off and be a maverick because that's who their character is, their choices can still be discreetly handled without breaking the illusion.

I agree it doesn't really suit this style of CRPG. But it depends how you view degradation. Complete degradation into broken, irreparable, irreplaceable scrap won't fly with anyone. And temporary, encounter-only debuffs seem a bit artificial and not really a threat. What I was getting at a few posts back is the idea that your weapon is a bit like your character: it's fully functional until it reaches 0 HP. Then it enters a "state", but not unconsciousness. Just degraded. Reduced to about two thirds of its base stats until you fix it. The easiest way would be to camp and regain half the item HP free of charge, assuming you had a normal whetstone (a few GP from blacksmith merchant) or a requisite armour repair talent. Of course, at low levels, you could just replace the items from regular loot drops. The question is, how do you adapt as you gain levels and acquire magical arms and armour? Do you keep paying a blacksmith to repair them fully, or do you choose a longer term strategy via talents and skills and do it yourself? Edit: Think of the weapon/armour as being "Enfeebled".

For me, it never felt right to have such young NPCs in the party. Neeshka reminded me of a cheerleader, and Qara was the highschool bully you love to hate. If there was a way to turn off the voice-over, I must've missed it. I prefer more mature, cynical, and politically incorrect types. Ones that have *earned* the right to be cranky. Some of the NPCs from BG/BG2 were a bit like that.

Maybe bows and crossbows become degraded after firing X number of arrows/bolts, so their damage output is one dice lower until they are "re-tensioned", either around the campfire or in town. Degraded Shortbow = d4 damage. Degraded Longbow = d6 damage. Degraded Light Crossbow = d6 damage. Degraded Heavy Crossbow = d8 damage.

Here's my suggestion for Armour and Weapon Degradation. I had two goals when deciding how it might work. 1. Is it fun?* 2. Does it consider player psychology? * I'm not sure I'd ever call it "fun", but it can be challenging, compelling, or nailbiting. Using 3.5ed terms: - Determine Armour HP and Weapon HP. Suggest AC x 100 and Damage x 100 for new, non-degraded items. - Once reduced to 0 HP, the item is not lost. It enters a functioning "Degraded" state. - Degraded armour does not fall to pieces. Degraded weapons do not break. - Degraded armour retains all enchantments, but its base AC drops by one category (or 3 points) but will never drop below 0, i.e. Heavy Full Plate (AC 8 ) becomes as effective as Medium Chainmail (AC 5), which becomes as effective as Light Leather Armour (AC 2), which becomes effectively clothing. - Attributes like Armour Type, Max Dex Bonus, Armour Check Penalty, and Arcane Spell Failure are unaffected. - Degraded weapons retain all enchantments, but their "damage dice" drops by one dice type, i.e. d12 becomes d10, becomes d8, becomes d6, becomes d4, becomes d2, and can go no lower. - All other weapon attributes remain unaffected. - All weapons and armour remain fully usable while degraded. - You can right-click on these items and view current HP. Also have it displayed on the Inventory UI near the weapon selection and AC sections. - The sudden transition from Normal to Degraded seems to keep with other sudden events in combat, eg, sudden spell effects, sudden criticals, sudden enemy behaviour. Ways to repair degraded weapons and armour (and you don't have to wait until they are fully degraded): - Pay a blacksmith. - Cast a mending spell. - DIY. Characters with an appropriate background profession or talent like Armourer or Weaponsmith could make the repairs at little or no monetary cost in town or at any workbench. - Half the item's HP could be mended by hand around a campfire during a rest stage. - Use a whetstone or honing stone (on slashing/piercing metal weapons). - Anomalies like wooden or ranged weapons may be excluded from degradation. Unsure. Final thoughts - Maybe Fighters have a class ability that lets them double the life of armour and weapons? (Double the HP). Yay, fighters! - Armour degradation can be thought of as the fastenings being damaged, rather than large sections. Plate mail has rivets, straps and buckles that can break. Chainmail has links that do not fall out, but are simply moved apart revealing a hole. And leather armour also has straps and fasteners. - Maybe the UI or your character can warn you mid-battle when you are approaching a degraded item state. 10% maybe. - These suggestions don't cover everything. You guys can have a fiddle with it if you like. - Thanks to Lephys for suggesting armour and weapons retain their enchantments. PS. I made a suit of chainmail once. It took months, and felt like I was carrying a bag of dry cement on each shoulder. Holy damn it was heavy. But the links are easily re-sewable with the right tools. No need for an armoury.

I agree the reputation system doesn't need to have an immediate and all-encompassing effect. Regions are good. And corruption is good too. I'm all for shady factions making accusations against the player, or trying to frame them. As long as factions are affected (eventually) by your choices -- good or evil -- random, or by design -- and you can *see* that effect upon the game world through the action and dialogue of those factions. If I hack up a forest of random bears (a chaotic act), it may anger a druidic faction. So there are consequences. If I betray a local crime lord, I'll expect an assassin's blade while I sleep. So there are consequences. If I divert from one quest on the way to another, and encounter some random bandits on the way, I can talk, run, sneak, or hack the living s**t out of them. It's my choice. And I want the appropriate xp for it, regardless of whose quest it is. If those bandits happen to work for one of my quest-givers, all the more reason to roleplay out the consequences. I don't want to ever be prevented from roleplaying my character's "alignment" or ideology because a form of morality was incorrectly built into the grassroot core mechanics. But I'm more than happy to allow the consequences of my actions be decided by a dynamic reputation system, and accept responsibility for those actions.

As a side note, are we going to see a character's soul react in some way when the character's actions are at odds with their alignment? P:E won't be using alignment though, hence the reputation/faction system. If you're playing the equivalent of a lawful or good character, and you kill innocent people, shouldn't your soul react with a guilt warning, and eventually enforce some kind of penalty? And if you're playing the equivalent of chaotic or evil, and you perform an uncharacteristically good act, shouldn't the same thing happen? I would still hope one can achieve a character arc that transforms from light to dark or dark to light. You don't *have* to stay with one alignment or play style the entire time. Your choice of deity at character creation (if any) should determine your starting allegiance. But you could swear a new allegiance as the game progresses.

Bring back the Rust Monster! (or not)

This is in response to the many threads in disagreement over how XP rewards and quest objectives should be handled. There have been many good arguments from many different perspectives. I will summarize my own personal opinion on the matter, and leave the floor open for you to add constructive criticism. This isn't about right or wrong or an aversion to change. It's about creating a "balanced" system for all play styles that doesn't prevent certain behaviour, but rather reacts to it. Thankyou, and keep smiling. My thoughts on Cause and Effect (in a nutshell): - Cause should be controlled by the Core Mechanics. You can run around and hit things. It's your choice. - Effect should be evaluated by the Reputation System. If you hit things you shouldn't hit, there are consequences. - The Core Mechanics should only deal with numbers. - The Reputation System should adjudicate character behaviour. - If the numbers say your character has been a naughty boy, then your reputation influences the appropriate factions. - If you continue to be a good boy, you remain in good standing with the appropriate factions. Or it may even increase your standing. - If you continue to be a naughty boy, the appropriate factions react to you accordingly, i.e., If you go looking for trouble, you will find it. If a player's actions seem unlawful, or despicable, or grindy, or in bad taste, do not prevent it from happening by excluding it from the core mechanics or blatantly denying them XP. Add incentives or disincentives in the game content that allow the player to make a choice as to whether they continue that play style or change. The same goes for lawful behaviour. We need to treat players like adults and let them accept responsibility for their actions. I would like to play Project Eternity as a good guy, as a bad guy, as a good guy who turns bad, as a bad guy who turns good, and maybe the odd neutral play style too. I don't want to be pre-judged by the core mechanics, only judged by my actions that are then handled by the reputation system. Love, peace, and chicken grease. Some background threads to this post: - Degenerate Gameplay - Balancing Stealth vs Combat - Good vs Evil Roleplaying Rewards

It's ok that we can agree to disagree on this topic. That's cool. But I fear that you're still missing what I'm saying. In your above example, you're pre-applying logic and rationale to illogical and irrational behaviour, and discounting that from the core mechanics. Whilst I don't condone bad behaviour in the real world, you should still have the option in the game world to act irrationally (if you're playing chaotic or evil for example) provided there are consequences. So instead of pre-judging the killing of random bears as non-sensical or irrational, you simply apply the same core mechanic, like the bear's CR vs your party's power level, and let the core mechanics deal with xp. It might be low. It might be zero. That's irrelevant. What's relevant is that your chaotic character should never be penalized for acting chaotically. Edit: That's what the reputation system is for.

As a sorceress, Qara was a useful companion. But any time you have someone in your team who is not a team player, it feels more like a waste of time rather than roleplaying all the "conflict resolution". It's like watching an episode of "The Apprentice". Personally, I could have done without her attitude. I remember her for all the wrong reasons, to the point where I built my own sorcerer and played the game without her, just so I didn't have to listen to her. Her voice was like a cheese grater against the side of my head. Same with Neeshka.

I don't want xp for every little thing. I'm saying if you want to play badass, you shouldn't be tied to *only* the quest objectives defined by quest-givers. If you hack up a forest of bears and squirrels for the xp, you'll likely attract the notice of druidic factions looking for answers. If you hack up a few merchants for the xp, you'll likely attract anything from law enforcement to assassins following you around. Neither of those scenarios might be a game objective, but you should still have the option of doing it, *if* it's in your character's nature to do so. My worry is that a certain level of morality will unintentionally go into the core mechanics, when that area in particular should remain unbiased. Anything to do with good and bad behaviour should go into the content only, and be handled by the reputation system. Core mechanics should be robotic and unjudgemental. Otherwise there's no point in a reputation system.

There should be an option to add custom voice sets like in IWD/IWD2. So if you want Beavis and Butt-head, or Arnold Schwarzenegger, or in your party, drag and drop. Problem solved.

I will probably play the law abiding citizen-turned-hero on the first playthrough. And I will make all the obvious "good" choices. And I will want to complete all my quests like a good little adventurer. On the second playthrough, I might want to play a chaotic bull-buggering lunatic. But wait! I can't! There's no incentive to do nasty stuff, because the core mechanics assumed I would play nice. Oh well, they just wasted all that time and money putting in a reputation system that could measure behaviour, but it'll always be lop-sided towards good. And everyone will be standing around, scratchin' their arses wondering how *that* could have happened. And the silly thing is, there will be an "XP Mod" to fix it, released within a week. Because that's what modders do. They tweak games the way they should've been tweaked in the first place. Sad.

Well I stand by my comments because I care about the Baldur's Gate legacy and have invested in Project Eternity. The developers finally have an opportunity to properly adjudicate player behaviour via the new reputation system, and allow the game engine to make some sophisticated decisions on how to react to that behaviour. As an analogy: If someone repeatedly speeds past your house in their car, day after day, you don't organize a petition to close off the street or put speed bumps outside your house. You notify the authorities and they will deal with it.

Project Eternity Lego Mod.

Removing the kill xp option is a knee-jerk reaction to what some people are calling degenerate behaviour, when it is in fact a valid play style for chaotic and/or evil characters. Kill xp isn't a broken system. Erratic player behaviour is the real issue, i.e. a lawful or good character suddenly deciding to kill a forest full of bears and squirrels for the xp. The reputation system was already in BG1/BG2 etc, but it only affected things like merchants prices, whether your companions stayed with you, and how often you were confronted by the law. I'm looking at page 143 of the original BG manual, which lists all the ways your reputation can suffer: - Killing an innocent - Injuring an innocent - Stealing - Killing a Flaming Fist soldier - The "worse" your starting alignment Kill xp works. And objective/quest xp works. They may require tweaking, but they are certainly not broken. They've already stated they are going to use a dynamic reputation system in P:E that decides how various factions react to you, based on your actions. If they use the BG system as a basis, then build on that, then that seems like the most efficient design option. There's really no need to re-invent the wheel. Only to make sure the wagon they're attached to doesn't break down at the first pot hole.

If you want to swap weapons or drink a potion during battle, you should just "lose a turn", so you're taking a gamble the enemy won't hit you. I think this is already true for potions, because I've been hit whilst quaffing a healing potion before.

If I keep arbitrarily killing things (for xp), then it should close off future opportunities for me to "double-dip". So a law abiding player will get their kill/objective/quest xp, but a deviant will not. They will only get kill xp and forfeit the quest xp. So it's up to them to either change their behaviour, or seek out dark quests for kill/objective/quest xp that a law-abiding type may not have access to, or may not want. It's swings and roundabouts.

I wouldn't mind seeing some mind flayer tech. They've used that before in some level designs. Maybe a technology related quest could be woven into P:E, one that allows the Cipher to shine? Some kind of device that allows the party to use it against an illithid menace, by "powering up" the party for a boss fight. But then that technology doesn't work in the outside world because the link has been severed. Possibly cliche, but they could mix things up a little. I'd like to see how mind flayers deal with a *Blunderbuss* in that smug squid-face of theirs.