Jump to content
  • Sign Up


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

37 Excellent

About Thangorodrim

  • Rank
    (2) Evoker

Profile Information

  • Location
    The land beyond beyond ... the world past hope and fear
  • Interests
    PC and iOS Gaming, Audiobooks, bicycling, music, movies


  • Pillars of Eternity Backer Badge
  • Pillars of Eternity Kickstarter Badge
  • Deadfire Backer Badge
  • Deadfire Fig Backer
  1. Another interesting artsy thing might be that as the adventure progresses you come into taverns and you hear them singing songs about your exploits ... or maybe some of the villages have local painters that are painting your adventurers
  2. I don't know ... I think that cut scenes in games have been done to death and aren't really that powerful anymore ... I think if they add some sort of narrative introduction to certain key game areas or major regions it might establish more of a connection to the game in a literary sense and that might help with emotional attachment of some sort. As to specific emotional events I wouldn't mind some sort of location or event where they try and build a more emotional atmosphere (but not with over the top stuff like DA). Perhaps you could encounter a haunted castle as a quest. Different rooms or areas could have the spirits acting out scenes related to their untimely deaths. The quest could allow you to either slay the ghosts (ignoring the story) or there could be clues in their reenactments that allow you to put the spirits to rest instead of destroying them (that option should offer more experience). Kind of a CSI: PE quest
  3. Well, since we are going to have 2 cities because of the stretch goals maybe they could make a story element about this ... one city could be less crowded because it is in decline and not fully populated (they could have the city be somewhat in disrepair) or maybe it could be suffering from a disease or curse ... the other could be the newer booming city ... I like the idea of a ruined city as well ... it would be great if it was a large city and populated with wild animals and various monsters
  4. Because it would be boring otherwise. Why would your farm-raised (merchant/whatever) boy/girl leave the farm without some sort of call to action? Why would anyone in their right mind leave the security of their mundane surroundings to go fight monsters? Even Jack in the Bean Stalk has a call to action. Why is your country boy going to the big city? The story you are talking about country boy goes to city, witnesses some event, and then buys his plow and returns to the farm is very boring. Yes, God forbid a rebellious young farmer would ever want to leave the boring farm country he sees day after day to go see that big wide world right over the horizon without witnessing a soul shattering event of some sort ... maybe we have the Sir Edmund Hilary (make that George Mallory ) of farmers ("because it was there") or the We Bought a Zoo version "Why not" ... just saying it is an option not totally out of the realm of possibility
  5. I think the amoral approach you suggest should definitely be an option but depending on your point of view certain actions can be considered distinctly more "right" or more "wrong" ... the difference between rescuing the Little Sisters in Bioshock and harvesting them is stark ... and there are different rewards or penalties for pursuing either approach (but they are both viable game play options that suit a particular playing style) ... I like to have a few choices in the game and consequences that are equally stark
  6. I don't think the system can or should prevent certain actions ... I think it should just result in different game play results if you pursue a "kill everything on the map" approach vs a "rescue everything on the map" approach vs something in between ... whether the results of your actions are considered a penalty or reward largely depends on the player's perspective but I think actions should have results and actions that are grayer in nature should have results that are equally gray
  7. Why does the game need an event at all? Why not just have the character going into the world with the wide eyed intensity of the country boy going to the big city? If an event is needed to propel the quest it doesn't need to revolve around the main character at all. It's not like we are going to not play the game if the event doesn't involve us directly
  8. Even without formal alignment they could still do a mix of good, bad, and grey ... as you mentioned however, without alignment you might get more shades of grey ... hopefully even without alignment they will have some measure of a character's "goodness" or "badness" ... whether they go the route of Karma or renown/infamy or something else it is useful to give characters actual moral choices with consequences (being good in Fallout 3 resulted in a bounty on your head from the 'evil' factions while being evil resulted in you being hunted by the 'good' factions - only by being neutral could you avoid the hunters) ... it also provides some nice gated quest opportunities (are you good enough for the priests to hire you for their quest ... are you evil/amoral enough to join the bandit or pirate gang or be hired by the evil magician) ... another advantage of some form of alignment is it provides a penalty for just killing everything that moves ... PE isn't an FPS games .... although some characters are content to slay their way through the countryside leaving a red swath behind them, others enjoy a more nuanced playing style where killing isn't always the only or the best solution to a problem ... alignment of some sort makes it easier to measure where on the scale you fall, so that the other NPCs can react accordingly (do the woman and children run and hide when you enter a town or do they cheer the arrival of the party ) ... it is always good to have an adventuring environment that is big enough to accommodate your playing style whether you favor Thomas Aquinas, Machiavelli, or somewhere in between
  9. It is nice to have a little depth to your characters and NPCs... most people are neither completely black or completely white but some shade of grey ... villains who have a little depth to them or tragic heroes are always more interesting ... one of my favorite examples of a villain who you can't quite hate or love is the character in the Star Trek Next Generation episode "The Survivors" ... when they finally discover his "crime" they respond that they have no court capable of judging his crime or a being of his power so they simply leave him be Another notable example is the comment made about Sauron when he reminds the Fellowship that even Sauron wasn't always evil Depth and range are desirable both in fiction and in games
  10. What do folks think of quests with clear moral connotations, depending on the solution chosen? - the Slaver quest in Fallout 3 where you can either kill the slavers or sell the former slaves to them - Neverwinter Nights quest where you are presented with the "opportunity" to sell diseased blankets to orcs (I think it was) to subject them to a form of genocide - your choices of disposition for Megaton City in Fallout 3 (Save it, Destroy it, leave it alone) - Choice of siding with the Zombies or the Residents of Ten Penny towers in Fallout 3 ... although with the results, the morality of those two choices wasn't that stark a choice (more of a lesser of two evils) Those are several that readily come to mind but I am sure there are many others. I actually like having the choice, even though I never play as an evil character so I never get to partake of the evil choices. Although I played through the Assassin's guild quests for Elder Scrolls Oblivion I actually found it somewhat distasteful that I only had the evil options available to me (but I just held my nose figuratively and soldiered on). So what do other folks think? Lots of moral choices for standard quests, some evil and some good quests, or tons of both? And what about neutrality as a choice? I have never been much for this option and it is tough to balance in a game but I know some folks like that approach. Sorry, if this is addressed in another thread already.
  11. What if you run into a dungeon with a really narrow door ... the other characters might have to kick and push him to get him inside ... either that or he might get stuck in the only entrance and the characters who rushed in ahead of him will slowly starve to death The party will simply have to lube him/her up with lard, a d20 roll will be required for success, rolling a crit failure will be amusing. I wouldn't mind if they got those bonuses btw, but they should have a penalty to AC (easier to hit) and take a dex penalty as well. Hmmm ... I wonder which store will sell that valuable item ... either that or I finally found a use for that +1 Chain-mail of slipperiness
  12. Unless it serves some purpose in the game it probably isn't needed. - Alcohol serves a distinct purpose since the taverns were the social and news centers of the day, and the tradition of taverns in RPGs is well established. Most RPGs also give you distinct penalties (as in real life) for over indulging (lowered dexterity and sometimes an inability to fully control actions). - Stims were well represented in Fallout and they also had distince uses and penalties for overuse. - skooma was used in Elder Scrolls for several quests and the player had the option to use with very distinct penalties (and a few minor advantages, depending on your gaming style) - the Black Lotus was well represented in Conan literature, also with distinct disadvantages and penalties for usage If they design some plot points where drugs can be used effectively (and with accurate penalties for abuse) then I have no problem with their inclusion, but if they are just window dressing they are best left out. Alcohol will give plenty of abuse potential
  13. What if you run into a dungeon with a really narrow door ... the other characters might have to kick and push him to get him inside ... either that or he might get stuck in the only entrance and the characters who rushed in ahead of him will slowly starve to death
  14. If you look at the literary character of Conan the Barbarian he had some of his greatest adventures in his 30's and became the King of Aquilonia in his mid 40's. A middle age is certainly realistic. The literary characters of Frodo and Bilbo Baggins in LoTR and Hobbit were both adventuring in their middle ages as well. As I think about it more after reading the wide variety of posts and opinions on this, I would think these types of restrictions would work best for age, if it was actually implemented: Strength could be maximum of 19 through age 21 or so. Max of 18 into mid 30's. Max of 17 into late 40's. Then decrease gradually after that to maybe a maximum of 15 at 60+. Rationale is that men do generally tend to be strongest while young but they could still be very strong in middle age. Constitution could be maximum of 17 through age 21 or so. Max of 18 through 30. Max of 19 through 40. Then decrease gradually after that to maybe a max of 15 or 16 at 60+. Rationale is that middle age could actually increase constitution through seasoning and more world experience. Intelligence could be maximum of 17 through age 21 or so. Max of 18 through 25. Max of 19/20 into middle age (50 maybe). And then max of 17/18 after that. Rationale is new scientific study on the development of the brain and that some centers of the brain don't fully mature until mid 20's. Wisdom could be maximum of 16 through age 18. Max of 17 through mid 20's. Max of 18 through 30. Max of 19/20 for beyond. No deterioration with age. Rationale is same as above using brain development studies. Dexterity could be maximum of 18 through age 18. Max of 19/20 through late 20's. And then gradually deteriorate with age down to 15/16 range in sunset years. Rationale is that physical deterioration would probably affect this ability similar to strength. Charisma could follow a similar progression to Wisdom with maybe some slight deterioration in later years. Rationale that if you are too young some people will doubt your experience to lead and too old your stamina to lead. But in the middle ranges where you have both experience and vigor you would be more of a charismatic leader. You could also pick up 2-4 skills for every 10 years of age. Rationale being you get exposed to a variety of professions and training, if you live long enough Anyway, they won't implement age that way since it would add way too much complexity to the game. But it does make for an interesting thought experiment. Kind of a Schrodinger's Maturity Index
  15. They had different views because then, a luxurious sedentary lifestyle was an all but unimaginable dream for the majority of people. Fat was a sign of being well off, and not having to work hard. Now, that's the norm, and having the time/money to buy healthy food and work out is a sign of success. So while some fat may have been considered attractive, that was exactly because it was not seen on the kind folks we're likely to be playing as in PE. Also, obesity was associated with gluttony and laziness practically since the beginning of time. When people say that fat was attractive, they're talking about slightly chubby sculptures and paintings, not what modern Americans consider "fat". I get the sense the OP is a member of the anti chainmail bikini crowd. If "realism" is really at all important, characters who travel the country by foot and fight all day long should be pretty goddam fit. Are we talking about fat or clinically obese people? That said, I do not see why some NPCs or even one of companions, like a cleric/mage/cipher or similar should not be chubby/fat? I am all for some NPCs in the privileged and wealthy classes being obese, if that is what the developers want, but an obese beggar or obese peasant or obese companion would be far less likely ... I wouldn't mind an obese companion if they were realistically constrained by that handicap (and in an adventuring environment it would be a handicap ) ... if the companion couldn't carry hardly any weight before they become encumbered and couldn't move, and if they had a slow movement rate so they were always falling behind and the rest of the party had to wait for them to catch up then I would support that ... but let's be realistic about our parties ... we don't have horses so we are hiking 20-30+ miles a day with full packs in armor ... we are also engaging in physically stressful activities like combat, exploring dangerous dungeons, and looting corpses ... a corpulent party member wouldn't last long in those situations or would cease to be corpulent very quickly ... if someone wants a full figured portrait then make that an option but leave the adventurer and companion avatars in a more "realistic" state of lean mean dungeon exploring machines
  • Create New...