Jump to content

Sacred_Path

Members
  • Posts

    1328
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Sacred_Path

  1. obyknven is the only person I want to see the sexism in vidya games issue tackled by. He's the troll to end all trolling.
  2. I second the notion that players should have to grovel, beg, and bribe their AI controlled party members. I personally would simply use the non-AI controlled characters from the Adventurer's Hall, but people asking for interactivity should have their hands full at all times.
  3. I can't quite see your problem. What I said is that I wonder how cohesive elements like Godlike, flagellants, soul powers and the "New World" theme will be. Obviously, like you realized, we are lacking information, and right now I'm a tad skeptical.
  4. How exactly is that pointless?
  5. In IE games, most parties ended up looking same-y, and the only choice you had to make was wether to be a fighter and pick up a mage, or be a mage and pick up a fighter. I'm very enthused by the PE promise to really allow for diverse parties.
  6. the point... you do not get it.
  7. Of all the races, the one that I'm least sure of wether it has earned its right in the game is the Godlike. So far, we had people who are partly gods, factions that like to flagellate themselves, souls everywhere, and colonialism thrown in for good measure. I'm still looking for the red thread here.
  8. I wouldn't appreciate the limitations this would impose on the player - if I want to kill a specific monster/ NPC with my diplomat character/ party, I want to be able to attempt that, not having to consider that this might cost me skill points at the next level up. What I'd prefer, and what would essentially achieve what you want to achieve, is deriving skill points from stats; say, STR+DEX for combat, INT+WIS for non-combat. This way you can send characters down a specific path, but they can stray from it during the game (within their possibilities). Of course, this is a tad hard to balance.
  9. I second the sentiment that a party's residence could have an effect on how NPCs perceive you. I think I even suggested that in one thread. But, going from shack to mansion to castle is just another linear power progression of which there are so many in any CRPG... IMO it would suffice to go from "homeless" to nobles with a stronghold. exactly. If you are to have a residence in the world, make it the center of the player's world, not the periphery.
  10. What's missing in most RPGs that have strongholds is ways in which it ties into the adventure. They're supposed to be bases of operations, but in most cases, they aren't. They are isolated places you return to in between quests to order an item or empty the party's coffers. If hostiles show up at the gates at all, these tend to be encounters you only have for the very reason that you own a stronghold - not those foes you were crusading against before your trip to the stronghold. Yes it's vague, or rather all-encompassing, and not falling within that means strongholds often are about as necessary as appendices. What's the point in owning a location that doesn't supply you with quests, items, or exclusive advantages (such as resting when it's not possible in the wilderness)? Exactly. That's why I don't see the need for shacks or manors in this game.
  11. Like I said, defending the stronghold is usually just busywork (although a lot of people seemed to have fun with it in NWN2). What I meant is that a stronghold serves the obvious purpose of keeping harm away from you. This just about never really happens in RPGs; the stronghold is on a map/ perimeter of its own, away from hostiles. There's a lot of untapped potential there. welp, if there's no gameplay in it related to combat, it should enhance gameplay in some other way. If it just sits there or serves as a gold sink with nothing in return, then yes, it's a LARPing element. Of course it can be a measure of the player's success, but then, it's the same as having rats for the player to stomp on at lvl 40 - no real relevance to the game but fun to watch for some.
  12. A stronghold has the potential to be just that - a fortified place of retreat. Of course, this potential is hardly ever used; at best, strongholds tend to create more busywork by having you defend them occasionally. OTOH, you can often outfit them with craftsmen. A stronghold can really contribute to gameplay. A shack or manor are just places for you to play dress up/ larp.
  13. "event image" makes me happy. but...wurms... srsly? Gize? SRSLY?
  14. Yes, that's very much the concern. And for the very reason that they chose this approach, I think they wouldn't support your solution, although I personally would find it an enjoyable compromise.
  15. I'm a little torn on most monsters having names in an in-game language. It's cool, but calling a banshee a banshee is fine in my book too. Anyways, thx for this update!
  16. thx for this update. I can almost tolerate monks now.
  17. which rests on the assumption, as I said, that a Skuldr is a predator. Which may not even be the case, and certainly doesn't touch on its importance vs. stealth characters.
  18. the latter I find a lot more unlikely, but yes, this is a stab in the dark from both sides. If the monster really came before the mechanics, you could make up any number of reasons for this ability (like a species of "watchdogs" bred to detect intelligent, living intruders rather than mindless undead or construcs). Maybe Lephys' point is that it's not really as lame as I said it was, but I must say, if you want someone to disrupt the party's stealth there are more creative ways (rigging their lairs with traps, or routinely spraying the pathways of the lair with some AoE attack).
  19. You don't see the obvious bat inspiration there? Right down to describing this monster ability in the same way + "souls"? Seriously? what I said was that the Skuldr was designed to prevent stealth (which isn't exactly true, it makes stealth harder). Lephys was all "you don't know that! It could just be something that comes naturally with their natural habitat!". To which I didn't know what to say.
  20. I think that's a bit of a reach. There are snakes and other animals in reality that essentially have thermal "vision." I don't think that means they were specifically designed by evolution to prevent people from sneaking through the wilderness. I don't see the link between real animals with real abilities and a fictitious monster with a fictitious ability, but since we've learned that Skuldr only force you to up your game when you're playing stealthy, I'm retracting my claim that they were designed to prevent stealth.
  21. They should try to make a city work different from a small town, mechanics wise. Like enforced limits on possession of weapons/ working of magic, more shops and inns and *competent* healers, specialized pickpockets stealing your coin, gang fights, quests that require stealth and discretion rather than combat. If these are in, I'm willing to believe that I'm actually in a city.
  22. Neat idea! I don't know if they could be domesticated enough for a regular city or village, but maybe for a weirder or more dangerous type of place. given that with domesticated Skuldr all over the place in the Dyrwood stealth-heavy party would be given the boot, I doubt it. The relatively lame explanation ("it can see your soul") already make the Skuldr seem designed specifically to address certain fears among the community that you could "ghost" everywhere/ -thing. Or IOW, I don't think JES came up with this monster.
  23. Backed this at a low tier, but with projects like P:E, TToN and others, I somehow can't muster up much enthusiasm about this one. Halp?
×
×
  • Create New...