Jump to content

Sacred_Path

Members
  • Posts

    1328
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Sacred_Path

  1. The rogue is a big unknown, as is the cipher. It will be interesting to see where they take the rogue since he will lose his traditional spot as the group's most skilled character. Ciphers are most intriguing when it comes to dialogue and mind-reading.
  2. Well, he did say "change the looks of your armour, weapons, and other items." Color could be included. *le shrug* What he said was: Nothing about appearances, except that we are left to guess as to how much (or how well) the gear will be represented on your ingame character graphics. [/anal]
  3. Another iteration of the popular 'you don't agree with me, therefore this game is not for you!' trope. Well played sir [troll], well played!
  4. I very much hope that sheep won't be allowed to open trapped doors, and goblins won't fiddle with a chest's lock in a way that could set off its trap.
  5. well, at least that clears up the part about weapons and armor. Sawyer simply said you can change your gear, not alter your gear's colours.
  6. Humanoid enemies should switch to ranged attacks to dislodge you from your position. So it would still be a choice to hole yourself up somewhere, but only if you want to avoid melee.
  7. Transcript of the interesting bits of the gamers.de interview: How will character creation work? Will we be able to change the looks of our character? Will there be traits and perks, like in Fallout? Character models in Project: Eternity will be about the same size as those in the Infinity Engine games. You can customize the appearance of your character, i.e. haircut, hair colour, facial hair, skin colour and nuances of your clothes' colour. Of course you will have the option to change the looks of your armour, weapons and other items. [?] We want to give players the option to greatly customize the abilities of their characters. There will be numerous options for all classes. The setting to me sounds like a "New World" scenario. Will we board ships at certain stages in the game to reach new continents? We haven't chosen all game locations yet. Dyrwood is being called a "new world" by the colonists. Sea voyages play an important role in this part of the world. Speaking of romances. Relationships first made an appearance in Baldur's Gate (although sporadically), and to some extent in Planescape: Torment. Will there be romances in P:E? At this point we aren't focusing on romances. I'd only implement them if they fit the game well. Once we do the writing for the characters we'll see if romances are appropriate. One of the last stretch goals was a stronghold. Will strongholds differ according to character class, like in Baldur's Gate 2? The stronghold will be independent of the character's class. We'll allow players to enlarge and customize their stronghold. It will also serve as a quest hub. NPC personalities was one of the strong points of the IE games. What about P:E? Will there be DnD style alignments? Will characters have resentments towards each other, or will they even have romances? P:E doesn't have any moral mechanics. We're using a reputation system (like in Fallout: New Vegas). Factions and communities in the game will have differing views of the player. We think this system is more intuitive. The player can experiment with different factions without having the feeling of being judged by the game's designers. It's very important to us to have companions and other NPC's react to the main character. What about companions recruited through the Adventurer's Hall? Will they to some extent react to the player's decisions or will they be entirely faceless puppets like in Icewind Dale? Characters created in the Adventurer's Hall will have neutral personalities. The companions created for P:E OTOH have high reactivity and individual agendas. Speaking of Icewind Dale, I've always liked the option to import characters. Will I be able to restart the game with my lvl 60 dwarf? We're hoping that P:E is only the first in a series of games. Should we get the chance to develop one or several successors, we'll try to give players the option of importing their characters into these games. We haven't decided on a "new game +" function yet. Will there be different starting vignettes, like in Temple of Elemental Evil? Will they differ according to alignment, race etc.? The first part of the game is the same for all player characters, but culture, class, race and gender can have an influence on the story. The backstory of the protagonist isn't relevant to the plot, but the player's decisions after arriving in Dyrwood will carry the most weight. There was a feature in Planescape that fascinated me; it was the ability to speak with the dead. Since you've mentioned different dialects in the game, do you have any ideas about wether acquiring proficiency in a foreign language will be required of the player to make progress in a new area? You will very likely have to talk to "lost souls", decrypt uncommon dialects and translate forgotten languages. One of the rarer dialects in Dyrwood is Hylspeak, an archaic variant of the common Aedyr language. Many associate Hylspeak with memories of a past life. Superstitious people will therefore often react negatively to hearing this dialect. How much of the text will be voiced? Will you go the same route as in Baldur's Gate where there are only few important speakers or will the game be fully voiced like Skyrim or Gothic? We prefer "partial voice overs". This gives us more flexibility in writing dialogue and saves time and money. Key characters will have voice overs, but they will be short even for these characters.
  8. By popular demand, we implement the 'silly hat'. We're still contemplating two ways: 1) You can put on the hat instead of a helmet but you'll die in one hit. You will be happy about this option if you're a real r0leplay0r! 2) We make the silly hat just as strong as a normal helmet. Nobody should be penalized for their choice of equipment/ style!
  9. If you implement realistic fighting choreography, you better also implement sort-of-realistic dodge and parry mechanics. As long as a game only has 'attack bonus' and 'armor class', I don't need/ want to see realistic synchronized swirling and twirling of combatants. It feels like a simulation gone horribly wrong.
  10. I hope that skills are more open to all classes and that I don't need a rogue to build a good trap disarmer. Like I said in another thread, I think it should also be an expensive skill for specialists. I think in P:E, with the limited ways of getting back health, clearing traps by walking into them should be non-trivial. I like how they'll handle lockpicking (you use up lockpicks based on how high your skill is), they could do the same with traps (using up probes). I'd also like a bit of a mini-game for both.
  11. While I'd find it interesting to explore the basics of economy in a game (i.e. shops in remote regions should never carry more than one sword at a time), I find it even more interesting to look at the higher tiers of items. First of all usually shops can be at the end of the known world and still carry a variety of insanely powerful items. Secondly, they always take epic items off your hands. The reasons for selling these items are usually contrived themselves ("We found a staff of Earth Shattering, but we don't have a druid in the party". *sigh* Or "I need to get rid of this +4 amulet of mind protection because I've replaced it with a +5 amulet of mind protection and longevity"). These shops are always willing customers though, and they can afford those items too! "Luckily, I know a bunch of filthy rich druids. Therefore, I can pay you 50.000 gp. You won't get a better price around here!". Then these items sit in those shop's inventories until the end.
  12. My opinion: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/62993-skills-and-balance-in-pe/
  13. No Sawyer hate from me. Like I said, his opinion is entirely understandable in his position. And if it should so turn out in the end that every skill is as powerful and as frequently usable as any other, I'm certainly not gonna bitch and moan. I do have a different preference personally though. Sure! I just think it's a bit of a brute-force way to do it. True, it's probably not the most elegant way to do it. Though, if I had to choose between the elegant and the functional, I'd choose the latter. At least it's not overly convoluted (I think) Absolutely, I think the fact that we have a 6 person party calls for some radical way of enforcing choice and consequence of skills. I dimly remember IWD2, and IIRC the very useful skills were far and few in between. All of my parties usually turned out the same, skill wise.
  14. SO we're very early in development, but we've already heard a bit about skills in P:E so I'd like to ask everyone about their preferences. Going by what Josh Sawyer and Tim Cain have said so far they'll try to balance skills very well. They'll try to make them equal in terms of both power and opportunity. That's fine. In fact, from a professional designer's standpont that's probably what comes to mind first as an ideal. After all, you're literally selling your mechanics to the customer. If you give the player options, better make them balanced. Recently Josh made an example by giving two choices of skills (Read Ancient Poetry and Lockpicking). His point was that, if you offer the player this choice, Read Ancient Poetry should be a real viable alternative to Lockpicking. Personally, my preferences are a little different. Let's assume for this example that we're in a bit of a realistic Late Dark Ages/ Early Middle Ages setting, where locks are rather rare, and the players aren't swimming in gold. When there is a lock though, a container should usually hold something valuable. Due to this, Lockpicking should be one of the most powerful skills in the game. To balance this, different skill point costs should be attached to Lockpicking (i.e. it costs 3 points per rank), while Read Ancient Poetry should be a cheap skill to raise (costing 1 point). That way, you make it clear from the beginning that Read Ancient Poetry isn't going to pay off as much as Lockpicking. I'm not talking about totally gimping the player; practically, there MUST be instances where Ancient Poetry is useful in the game, otherwise it's bad design. However, I don't see the need to make both skills equally useful. It wouldn't make you a bad gamist if you put some points into Ancient Poetry instead of Lockpicking; it would simply make for a different and, possibly, more difficult playthrough. If you decide to spend all of your points on Ancient Poetry, this might make you a bad gamist, but a good roleplayer. Simply make the game play out realistically with this decision (in a single player game, this character might not be able to finish the game). That's not a bad thing at all. You tried a character build and it failed. It's not the designer's responsibility to make the game failproof IMO, and thereby make choices meaningless. Several skills come to mind that could be potentially very powerful but also expensive: - Alchemy - Lockpicking - Trap Disarming - Medical All of these potentially pay high dividends. Lockpicking can make you rich. Trap disarming can save your life. Alchemy produces spell-like or unique effects. Even if I don't get the chance to use them all the time, they could be v. powerful. Specializing in them (mastering them) should take serious dedication and limit your character building options accordingly. Some skills might be potentially powerful, but with some greater limitations (these cost 2 points per rank): - Sneaking - Pickpocketing - Smithing (Repair) While sneaking is useful for scouting and therefore potentially very powerful, it's not as great as it could be in a game with bottlenecks where you have to fight in the end anyway. Pickpocketing is usually only very powerful if you meta-game it (knowing which NPCs carry good items and reloading on failure). Consequences of failure are usually stark. Repair is v. useful if gold is rare or weapons get damaged in the middle of a dungeon, but potentially not as powerful if it can be done via NPCs. OTOH, cheap skills should not be as powerful, even though they might be more frequently used: - Herbalism - Heraldry - Read Ancient Poetry Herbalism could be used frequently throughout your travels, but be not very powerful on its own (it takes Alchemy to brew potions and herbs can also be bought). With their low cost these skills offer room for character diversity (even though you can also specialize in them). You will have 6 characters who can spend their non-combat skill points freely without losing combat effectiveness. So let's say there should be 6-8 skills in each of these categories to allow for some good character diversity. You get 2 or 3 skill points per level to spend on these. What I'd like to achieve that way is the following: - Party diversity. You probably won't have a specialist in all of the most powerful skills (and if you do, you'll have to completely neglect the other two categories). - Make some skills as epic as they deserve to be, not a grey mass where every skill is somewhat good and somewhat 'meh'. - Avoid certain pitfalls that come with trying to make all skills equal. (Limiting Alchemy to mimicking spell effects. Finding contrived reasons why Read Ancient Poetry is just as powerful as Lockpicking in your game.) If we look at Darklands as an example, you could choose certain professions that favored certain skills while neglecting others. Therefore, you could build a master alchemist who was brittle and bad at combat. This was offset by the fact that Alchemy was probably the most powerful skill in the game. It was also ok because it's a party based game and there one-dimensional specialist characters aren't a problem; they're only weak/ annoying in single character games or MMO's. Now in P:E, the problem of being entirely one-dimensional won't even exist because every character will be combat-able. But it would still be very nice to be able to say 'not every party will have or need a master alchemist. If you have one, that can be very helpful at certain stages in the game, but you'll have one less diverse party member'. Also, no matter how goofily you spend your non-combat skill points, it probably won't ruin your party entirely because they can still be good at combat. I'm coming exclusively from playing/ contemplating CRPGs. If you have played with systems like this or something similar, or if there's a consensus on wether it's good or bad, feel free to comment, or post your own preferences.
  15. Assuming that monks are a good idea in this game with nothing to go on vs. assuming it's a bad idea judging by what we have learned so far (about classes, races and art). Which is better and why?
  16. That may well be the case, though in P:E all classes have innate special abilities. Without a theme to them and without a good concept it's all drivel though. Trololol? I think I laid out clearly why monks are not exactly a good idea. And yes they will be in there. I also argue against romance and it will be in there. Maybe I just have a thing for lost causes
  17. But you didn't answer the QUESHUN Personally I'm rooting for the side that has the most self-awareness
  18. Then those reasons can't be very good, rite? "I like monks" isn't exactly a great justification. Also good job at not naming a single one of those many reasons. I didn't understand that grammatically. But I think you're asking what differentiation there is between the other classes? That's impossible to say right now, we don't have much information on classes. A fighter or Barbarian will be very distinct from a mage though as they will use powerful weapons (we don't know about the armor question yet), be able front liners, and will be effective even if their special abilities will run out. Enough of a difference between them and mages to justify their inclusion.
  19. Jew noses
  20. I thought I had baited you enough for you to explain why monks should be in there. Differentiation is exactly the issue, I feel the monk can do nothing that another class couldn't/ shouldn't do. The 'moving around the battlefield quickly' idea is ok but then that could be a rogue too. They actually have movement abilities (like HiPS). I'm simply not buying the 'monks could be based on Christians' line of thinking. They're too obviously Eastern. Christian knights (i.e. Templars) are usually represented by Paladins.
  21. mid-game is the only game as far as RPGs go, yo. Who said a story needs a beginning (peasant) and an end (superhero peasant) ?
  22. They are FR staples though. To which (by way of IE) P:E will be an homage. Remember, this is a game that will have elves and dwarves simply because "players want them". That's exactly the point, yes! Of course you can backpedal now by saying "but we don't know yet how the presence of monks will be explained! Could be some awesome reasoning". Well that makes me twitch and stuff but the point really is they haven't explained it at all yet. Uh, yes they do (have their roots in a real world region). Much like fighters in ornamented plate armor with two-handed swords. Uh, yes. Replace "bonobos" with "lawyers" (that's a class!). Now by your reasoning if there was a lawyer class we'd simply have to assume that bureaucracy in P:E is evolved enough to make that believable with nothing to go on. And I'd have to say "Bitch please. We have bloody religious skirmishes with epic explosives and hordes of fantastical monsters swarming the world. Surely lawyers have much less of a place in there than axe-wielding barbarians?!" If they can support themselves. Otherwise they don't exactly live. Orly? Sounds p. chilly to me. You got a bit convoluted there. "They totally fit into a Western theme except not, because they could be Chrisian but not really! I think the one thing that becomes apparent also here is that monk supporters try to refute the claim that monks are a bad idea, but they don't put anything forth that would explain why monks should be in there in the first place.
  23. The appearance of which figure in a Euro-centric tale like the Arthur myths would give the reader pause, most likely: Lancelot, Merlin, or Forton? The character art we've seen so far looks somewhat Caucasian, I'd argue. Enter mermaids, scarecrows and bonobos as playable races. It's for diversity's sake, silly! Right, skimpily clad hermits in the middle of nowhere enhanced the dales by a good margin.
  24. American LARPers: European LARPers: which are better and why?
  25. I could definitely see guns as a one-shot sidearm for front liners. *cough* Darklands *cough*. I'm all for long reload time and high damage (same as crossbows). A high velocity metal ball hitting you in the abdomen should drain stamina quite a bit. And no I don't care if the penetration power of a longbow is actually similar to that of a crossbow, it's about balance. Since guns are supposed to be so effective against mages though... I expect some limitations. Maybe ammunition is rare/ expensive. Maybe mages tend to attack in packs lest they be picked off like rabbits one by one.
×
×
  • Create New...