UncleBourbon

I imagine it would depend on the kind of fighter There are many legends of warriors that carried hundreds of swords, and likewise those that specialised in a single, honed blade.

This is a good point, and something hard to balance from character to character. Granted, in pen and paper some hilarious events can occur from going through your backpack trying to improvise - I recall dealing the killing blow to a necromancer chasing the party once by throwing a bard of soap and critting. But in-game it differs. One of my all time favorite party mates was a Paladin using a 10ft ladder as a bound improvised weapon (it took some reasoning with the DM, and like three feats) but through the entire campaign - even before he bound with it and all - we came to I think two actual times wherein we used a ladder. This is what I like to see with special dialog options to represent skill/item based actions, but accounting for them would be a monumental task. More on topic: It strains logic to suggest a well crafted sword would be carried instead of, or even with, a magical sword crafted just as well. But maybe the best sword crafter - or gunsmith - or blacksmith only makes certain articles out of certain anti-magical materials, or refuses to allow enchantment while being made.

Hard to answer, but I'll try. I've played through plenty of games despite gameplay components that simply irk me to no end - some jRPGs come to mind. On one hand, if gameplay is awesome enough, you can hope for some inspired writer to hop in and mod/rewrite it... But if the story is good and the gameplay is terrible you have the issues you mentioned. Examples would be NWN2 - something with arguably good potential for a D&D game, but (in my opinion) a sorely lacking campaign. Mask of the Betrayer went back and added an amazing story. Pretty much the same case with the original, actually. No More Heroes, or perhaps the .//hack games are an example of a rather meh mechanics, but a story that compelled me to play through them - or mostly. So I guess the real question for me here is, do I feel worse when I buy a game, find the machanics fun to play with but the story uninspiring, or the other way around? Using history as a model, I'd have to say story is vital for me, or at least the promise of a community willing to add to or "fix" the story. Of course the recent bioware games can be cited - the gameplay itself even had several issues - but so can some console games, or the less interesting jRPGs.

I agree with that, but Obsidian could implement it as a less rare occurance, causing one to rethink. Highly situational gear does tend to be less desirable in single player games, however, as it becomes simply keeping the pack half full of special-circumstance gear in case you run into something. I'd like the concept of consecrated/unholy equipment, something suggested in pathfinder - instead of alignment based bonuses, some bonuses against followers of a deity or portion of a panthion's followers. Still very situational, but with some tweaks, and restricting it to followers of a deity, a priest's holy robes or something could be kinda cool.

Wow, this is simply awesome. I miss good, old filk - I still have some casettes, though no player - and this is wonderfully alike. I look forward to more!

Well, I get that. Being treated the same is by most people estimation, better than being treated as inferior, or over sexed. There is a stereotype, however accurate, that female players are more likely to want strong romance or drama tones than male players, and this pattern of thought may be taken into account on some level by the developers (though to be fair, I've played through most cRPGs with a both a female and male PC when possible). As such, female PC indicating female player is a rather poor predictor. And sometimes it does get rather old that there are characters clearly placed to say something like "wow, even a woman can do it," and from time to time I might spend more than a moment's glance at the more feminine (and more flattered by outfits) attributes of the character. But I think a good step forward would be a seperation of "the PC is male/female" and more "The setting has most people with X views on each gender," or an establishment of gender norms for in-game cultures, followed by a few fleshed out characters.

To an extent, I would agree, but it isn't clear to me what a "magical" weapon would be. A soul's energy is cited as being something both a priest or a wizard can draw on for a totally different set of abilities, so it is unclear to me. If the soul is trapped and bound by way of magic, I would agree - the same if the blade were forged magically. But if a deity were to imbue it with some soul decidely too dangerous for reincarnation, or if a weapon simply happened to start to absorb some of an especially strong soul from a long time wielder - maybe as a natural quality? - it might be different. Supernatural, in most any case. As to top tier always being magical, I'd cite some [very] special circumstance rules from D&D: antimagic zones and pseudo-enchantments. That and the spell plague and such. Also a nifty old spell "immunity to magical weapons." Any of these, or similair circumstances, if present would at least mean some heroes would prefer to carry a set of nice magical equipment, and another of just super-well crafted mundane equipment.

I think there is also an issue there, Moonlight Butterfly. If you make all NPCs treat the character exactly the same, regardless of gender (aside from titles and how they address you), it might make the world seem a bit less organic. After all, even in-setting there are likely to be bigots and chauvinists, and if they go around badmouthing women to a male PC, I imagine it would be a "wtf?" moment if you talk to them as a female character and can't bring it up. Admittedly, I think the male character should be able to as well, but said NPC should react to the player character differently based upon gender. Of course, this is really me just contesting the assertion that female gamers want female player characters to be just like male player characters. The issue is that in the history of mankind, whenever something was posited as "different but equal," it has been anything but.

It is possible, but at least for now the level of technology is really the first or second iteration of black powder weaponry. It is suggested that while these relatively high-speed projectiles pierce the norm of magical protection - the "magical veil" - it doesn't seem as capable of going through both that and a suit of armor. Probably bruses, though. That said, I think some sort of rare, high-quality musket that has a chance of just going straight through would be neat, if unbalanced. Likewise with some weaponry using a trapped soul, or some portion of a soul (I'm thinking something like TES soul gems, or Xan's moon blade), giving the weapon some form of instinct to augment that of the wielder.

The issue, I think, is at what "equality" means - equal opportunities, or equal outcomes. Additionally, it seems there are some feminists, who, indeed, strive for as sort of equality, but others that want something akin to social reparations - the oppression of men to make up for the decades of women being treated as second class citizens, if that. Like this thread: is it really a matter of equality when it comes down to how women are portrayed in video games? Maybe if the media supposed it presented some view of the real world, and was proposing the discrimination/enslavement/disnefranchisement of women, I could see it, but a completely fictional piece? *braces for impact*

It's not like you'll be able to see it with perspective the game will be using. Unless the character sheet or talking figure is a picture that just really puts you off. Some of them in Arcanum did that to me. That said, this is something that should be stupidly easy for the community to change, or even an individual. Which ones? as far as I remember Arcanum had just heads as portraits. Indeed, an some faces just... no. And likewise with some of the more intricate NWN portraits. Not always that I didn't care for the portrait/head, but that they might not be the best fit for the character represented. That said, replacing them is pretty easy. Also, I'd really like for PE to use character sheet/conversation portraits, if possible.

Well, in the case I was talking about, we did, and I think they could do something like it. Basically, the DM we had would have something come up every month or so, and a session would be out of question - so each member would meet with him when we could, and talk through what exactly was happening. One of the best results of this was one guy going to join a church, and it turning out the priest was a follower of a dark god, and killed him (through a standard combat encounter between the two). He remained quiet at our next session, and we stumbled onto his reanimated corpse - good times. What I would suggest, though, which would be a burden on the developers, would be a few prepared sort of sequences (I'm thinking like some of the NWN mini-modules with a single encounter at a pub, with a few solutions) like one in a pub, one in the player home, or one in town or something. The thing would be, on either end of this sequence, your character is out of your control for some period of time, letting events in the world happen, and then a sequence where "one day you're at the pub and ..." or "you're resting from the chaotic, recent events in your home when X knocks on your door," and you act/respond, but then more time passes. Basically, the classic time-skip broken up a bit by a singular activity. A couple of reasons I would think this is a good idea is that the world shouldn't revolve completely around the player character - there should be a chance for things like uprisings, political movements, assaniations and large-scale events to occur (catalytic to the main plot or not) or occur, or even small scale ones like the local shop-keep passing away, and his irking, letcherous brother taking over. The second is that it gives the main plout a sort of pacing - I've played a good few RPGs and often I'm trouble saying "in character, that was what, 4-6 months? Is that really likely? Could a character go from village orphan to hero of Neverwinter?" Or taking care of potential plot inconsistancies regarding the raising of many foes, or gathering of forces. Heck, even long, drawn out rituals wouldn't need to be displayed as purely coincidental with the PC's arrival. Haerski does bring up some good points, though, in that it lessens the player's, and his/her character's personalisation, as it would mean there are "canon" portions of the character, dictated and limited by the developer's creativity.

It's not like you'll be able to see it with perspective the game will be using. Unless the character sheet or talking figure is a picture that just really puts you off. Some of them in Arcanum did that to me. That said, this is something that should be stupidly easy for the community to change, or even an individual.

I blame a bit of this on the rating system. Some refer to "mature" games (logically) like you do, that is, a game with complex and significant plot and/or setting, which is best appreciated by an adult. Others, likely because a common rating of video games as "rated mature," classifies all "mature" video games as those which are rated mature. This is a misnomer, I think, as games like Beyond Good and Evil and KotoRII are rated teen, as with a few other compelling, complex RPGs. But you have a nip shot, or even a street working woman - nevermind her dress, or any potential activity, just her existance - and BAM, rated mature. Violance is given a slight bit more room, but with higher graphics the raters (and the parents and politicians against violent video games and their "inevitable corruption of the funimentals of our society/children") get harsher. That, I will admit, I think is strongest in america. Sure, we have an all time high rate of drug use and pregnancy in our middle schools, but heaven forbid! Digital violence with a hint of sexuality existing in the universe! You have to be 18 (21 in areas) before this is safe! Edit: Also, to try and redirect back to the topic: I trust Obsidian to implement violence, sexuality, philosophy and other "mature" content with both the appropriate atmosphere, and level of detail. I don't see them possibly publishing this game with any rating under mature, given the current climate, but I know that will likely not stop me from buying it for my teenage nephew (barring they implement that "endangering a child" clause). I'd like to see some interesting situations where it isn't that the individuals were necessarily evil or cruel, but maybe just left with no resort. If you could be going through a cavern, and accidentally cause a minor shuffling of stones and such, and open up a hidden passage to find the remains of a lot adventuring party, with one poor individual shivering and gnawing on a femur, it would present a weird sort of relatively rare circumstance, I think.

Well, I think it is important that portraits/art shots/ cutscenes and such look real to the setting and such - all the more so because they are pretty much the only thing we'd base our perception of those little sprite-ants we control in game actually look like while swinging an axe about, or while trying to talk down bandits.

Yes, yes I do.

From what I've seen, there seems and aversion to an overall time-schedule with goals planted firmly in some calandar. Additionally, I don't know that the IE is suited well for day/night living world sort of NPC schedules - or that even if it does, that it would be best suited for PE. I'll leave that discussion to the appropriate thread. But what I would like to see discussed is how people feel about fixed time-like trigger (think some games where you drop something off at a smithy, and he says come back later, and that "later" is whenever you get around to doing a couple of tasks) or simple chapter like time skips. I think it is fair to say both have been implemented in the past with debatable results, in various forms of media. That said, do we want there to come a point in the story, where realistically, the next major story event wouldn't follow soon, and so we have a chance to finish things, then trigger a "x months later" transition? I've been fond of the sort of immediate, significant changes to the world in some cases. Catching up with companions again, seeing if they new shipment arrived at the weapon shop, that sort of thing. In pen and paper, I've had some DMs who insisted on this, usually after four sessions he'd say "okay, so there are like three or five months you guys have, what're you doing?" and some characters went to work crafting, others hunting clues about their antagonist or becoming a regular down at the pub. But that sort of freedom can be tricky in some games. If it is implemented, I'd like to see a text box with a list of plausible options to pass the time, drawn from both actions in the game and character traits/class/race etc, with results - at least personal gains/rewards - being appropriate. As a plot tool, I think time-skips can really help some adventures make more sense, but in terms of gameplay it can be frustrating, depending on implementation. I wouldn't like to see any "Oh well, too bad, your family went and got killed, no matter what" while time passes, unless it is somehow plausible.

I'd like some random encounters if you're in wild lands, or a forest known to house bandits, but most other encounters only being triggered after certain activities. An example would be assasins hunting you, or bounty hunters, like in Fallout 3. A nice text based explanation would be good, like "Your party starts to make camp for the night and [name of character/companion] hears something in the distance" or "You've been awoken to the sounds of battle! Quickly gather your wits and join the fray!"

While I don't like the accusation of americans being the "prudes," (I'm thinking Germany and Australia have higher levels of typical censoring and game alteration) I do think censorship and fear of it is too great for comfort. Especially in that violence is given so much freedom, but sexuality is so repressed. Hell, I know feminists who have seriously talked about how boxing is fun to watch in one sentence, and how they should've aborted their son as soon at the knew their gender (prompted by catching him looking at "filthy, disgusting, degrading, chauvinist porn"). Thinking about the more recent fallout games, and some of the other topics here, it does bring a point: why enable cannibalism, dismemberment and the carrying around of body parts, but feel so compelled to have bloody matresses with bound hands and feet, but oh no, the thought of a rape victim - dead or alive - is just so terrible. (It is, but in comparison it seems like they could have included it just to add to the terrible reality of the fallout universe).

I am all for it so long as it doesn't suffer from the Fallout 3 case of some nice quests and equipment never being found because merchants wandered into deathclaw territory and being made mincemeat.

I'd be okay with a generalisation based upon the kind of weapon you use, or the kind of gear you're wearing. Like if you go around carrying a blade, they could say something regarding being a fighter (as a general term) or something, and if you're wearing flimsy robes talk about how it doesn't look like you'd last long in a fight (despite any magic user probably being potent, and monks not caring.)

I am curious as well. I imagine half-elves would be a must, with the Aedyr being a dual-race empire, but it is completely possible that races in the world just cannot produce viable hybrids. I would be interested, too, in an exploration of sterile hybridisation; maybe half-elves are around, but by their nature cannot have children. Most mixed-races never appeal to me, with the exceptions of half-elves and godlike/planetouched, but I tend toward partying with such NPCs.

I think a good compromise is an NPC in-character warning for some quests along the lines of "Once we set out, we won't be back for some time" and "We won't be able to stop to see the sights or backtrack, so take what you need and continue."

Thats basically all Bethesda games ever. Clearly, there are just hidden schools of magic, like "muscle magic" and "speaking magic" and maybe "thieving magic"

I like all of these suggestions. Also, I'd like to see the soulless - animated by some force, perhaps greater or older than human, or just a human subsisting due to some incredible drive. Some manner of soul hunter would be cool too; but it would probably fall into the category of simply bad people, as I imagine it would be some manner of cipher/wizard or potentially a priest that has found ways to siphon or steal souls, perhaps only for the recently dead, to nefarious ends.