Sacred_Path
-
Posts
1328 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
About Sacred_Path
-
Rank
(9) Sorcerer
Badges
-
just two things: - either increase flexibility of characters (multiclassing should have that covered) or don't include bottlenecks early on, before a party can bloom. I've had many interesting parties kick the bucket in the keep's hall. - more incentives to figure reputations into your character concept. Like, how would a character be a great diplomat, if all they have is great strength?
-
I intended wacky to mean anything epic, larger-than-life, and by extension, supernatural. Korgan laughing in the face of every terrible monster is such an element, as is the Planar Sphere with its planar travel and its theme of atonement, or the Underdark which is obviously like a flipside or parallel world of the surface world, with its almost comically twisted inhabitants. At times all these emotions you mention come into play here, and I have to say I find this epic delivery ultimately more touching than Pillars', much like a fairy tale can be more touching than a milieu study.
- 45 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- counseling
- soul
- (and 2 more)
-
Allow me to remind you that this discussion on "What did mr. Sawyer mean" started with this response to my post: Sacred_Path, on 24 Aug 2016 - 12:10 PM, said: Which is where I started to try and figure out where has Josh Sawyer admitted it's a problem in the first place. Because without it, bringing up his name in the conversation is kind of pointless in the first place so I figured you probably know something I don't. It's quite obvious that when he uses the word soul but then goes on to talk about silly characters, that's not the whole truth. Humour isn't synonymous with soul. There's no need for inside information here.
-
Yes, there's the word 'Soul' used in the presentation. There's also the word 'Silly' used in the presentation. Neither has much relevance to what you are saying or to your statement "Josh thinks he's onto something" in relation to the tone of the world and both could be interpreted in may ways. What I'm asking you to do is to quote the relevant parts of the presentation as I don't see how do they relate to what you're saying so that we may continue the discussion constructively. You're doing yourself a disservice by trying to pass me as an idiot as opposed to properly quoting your sources - it's not actually that difficult to do and it would have saved us like 2 posts. The only part I have found which is relevant is "Introduce more diverse locations, be attentive to lore pacing, use Tyranny’s highlight system, include some sillier characters – possibly a different companion type." which doesn't at all reinforce your point that mr. Sawyer would consider the general tone and seriousness of the world a problem. Then there's "Players and reviewers had mixed to favorable reactions about the world and lore. There was a lot to learn and keep track of. Many players wished for more light, funny, or silly elements." He didn't say he agrees with the sentiment - just that it's a reaction of unspecified "Many" players which, again, is not saying much. In short: You're stretching his statements without even knowing the context. I've said repeatedly that Josh isn't actually aware of the problem I've pinpointed - either that or he doesn't admit it publicly (and with good reason, because it's one thing to say "our mechanics need tweaking" and another to say "on the whole our game was pretty uninspired").
-
This is mostly fluff and very little is actually made of the racial diversity in-game. Hardly anyone raises an eyebrow when they see a godlike (how could they with all the backer godlike NPC's standing around). Playing a death godlike was completely disappointing as the reactivity hinted at in the manual wasn't present. Attributes don't revolve around souls Abilities don't revolve around souls Combat resolution doesn't revolve around souls Souls are only sometimes mentioned in dialogue I wouldn't call that emphasis. Seems like a contradiction, everyone's a different species but in the end everyone basically is Vailian or Dyrwoodan? "Squeeing" seems to be a big thing to you, do you mean that NPC's express strong emotions? If so, I find that very fitting in a classic fantasy setting, especially because we're talking about a frontier type setting here. These people are the sons and daughters of settlers and pioneers, they shouldn't exhibit Victorian mannerisms. I think it's a fitting word, however superficially when people hear wacky they think of parody or goofiness, but I already explained how silly elements fit into the picture here. Anything that requires or facilitates suspension of disbelief is wacky in this context, Yes I agree Durance was a fitting companion for this type of game. OTOH he also sticks out almost too much for exactly this reason. I see other problems as well, such as the stronghold, combat resolution, the attribute system etc., but I actually think these problems are superficial compared to the fact that for a fantasy RPG, there's precious little well-realised fantasy in there.
-
Yes, that's where he mentions they should introduce some sillier characters, not that the game as a whole is not wacky enough, which brings me back to my original point of majority of people apparently liking the game. Do you have trouble reading the slides? He even uses the word soul.
-
I'm also talking about "little touches", however I can pinpoint what is meant by that. Verisimilitude is part of that btw. As it is now PoE's world doesn't make sense, dialogue is very personally oriented while the world is classic fantasy. It's also just as vanilla as D&D btw, unless you think widespread use of firearms somehow sets it apart. What you are saying is that if an NPC takes things seriously the player will too, I'd say that's an unsubstantiated claim and one I can't confirm. The history of games is full of examples of serious business stories but the delivery is completely laughable and doesn't touch the player at all. I'm not talking about turning PoE into a comedy game so that's hyperbole. PoE OTOH mostly lacks any tongue-in-cheek moments. A good RPG runs the whole gamut of emotion, PoE's tone is that of a ladies' teaparty throughout.
-
What makes side quests interesting? If you're making a fantasy RPG but you want to keep things "serious" you're obviously limiting yourself in what you can do. Defiance Bay suffers a lot from this, you just have to compare it to Athkatla to see that. An undead making machine is nothing compared to having a gang war with vampires, though that is also a problem of scope. But things like Pernisc's or the Salty Mast's quest are as banal and predictable as they come. BG's world seemed well-realised because it integrated the fantasy elements well. In PoE they stand out like a sore thumb. Humour and silliness aren't synonymous with wacky in this case. I take wacky here to mean anything requiring suspension of disbelief. However, seriousness stumps suspension of disbelief, so silliness can enhance the fantasy aspects (within limits). The points you mention would make for a more cohesive/ convincing gaming experience, but I don't see anything there that would require throwing the term soul around. Games can be a polished experience without anyone talking about soul.
-
I'm fine with you ignoring my points, just don't pretend to be able to follow what I've said
-
Did you see the GDC talk? Did he say anything along those lines? To my knowledge, Josh Sawyer only wishes for more diverse environments (which is quite understandable regardless of tone) and would like to add, quote, "Some sillier characters", emphasis on some - and, true enough, the game could use a little bit more humor, altho not that much. Overall, from interviews I've seen/heard, he's fairly happy with the tone of the world they've set in the original game. So where did you get the idea that even Josh Sawyer agrees with all of your points, disregarding the fact that him agreeing doesn't necessarily mean he's correct? It's in his slides http://media.obsidian.net/eternity/media/misc/pe-jsawyer-looking-back.pdf lol @ him agreeing with all of my points. I said he's clearly not come to the same conclusion as me (or he doesn't admit it)
-
Being evil or good gives you magical powers you think this is realistic good on you
-
"My hotel's as clean as an Elven arse." "Heya, it's me, Imoen!" Xzar and Montaron Khalid Minsc "Methinks you are no ordinary chicken!" Noober Golden pantaloons Edwina "Me axe is bloody ready!" Jan Jansen Planar Sphere Human Flesh Armor Boots of Speed Raise dead Level drain Mage battles Contingencies The Underdark Good/ evil path I rest my case (just because I can).
-
Josh thinks he's onto something I think he's onto something You don't think so (because you like the game) not a compelling argument either. Also I'm open to counter points beyond "you can't prove that" This is not about sales numbers, if it was about sales I'd suggest Obs dumb down and consolify their games more but they're already doing that (hello Tyranny). Adding wackiness, quirkiness, whatever you call it, would have been required to make a more traditional RPG, and certainly to make an IE games successor. That's my point. If that's better or not is open to discussion, but as I said if you argue against it you'd have to reconcile the serious business tone of things with the "let's go kill some evul munsters" aspects first.
-
I was specifically talking about people who are disappointed in a way with the game, not those who "love" it. But how can someone love PoE and BG/ IWD at the same time?!? Truly, I think it's possible. Maybe they like the diversity. Maybe they feel the game is more than the sum of its parts. Maybe, or very likely, these people aren't aware of the rift between serious business dialogue and roflstomping dragons for phat loot. Either way, I don't think it matters.
-
By "disappointed with PoE" I meant no more than "disappointed with this certain aspect of it", although I've seen enough people criticize the game at large. Still, Josh has taken notice of the problem so it's kind of pointless of you to deny it exists.
