Sacred_Path
-
Posts
1328 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Sacred_Path
-
-
So illogical maps and extremely generic corridors with some hardcoded points of interest are OK? See, that's why I think some people got PE wrong. What you want is Diablo. What I want is perfect had-crafted world, that makes sense and is logically connected. You can't really do that with randomization, unless it's only the way Grim Dawn uses, i.e. barricades within pre-built world.
Not that I mentioned random maps, but I'll go with it.
As far as dungeons go, there's not much logic in them in most games. Wether you encounter the same monsters in the same rooms over and over or different monsters in different rooms shouldn't make much of a difference there. Except the latter is probably more interesting/ definitely has an element of surprise that you don't have in a replay w/o randomization.
-
1. A main plot that is time-limited is in direct conflict with a game that encourages exploration and is content-rich with sidequests. Thus a bad fit for what most of us are expecting from PE.
Cannot agree here. If there is no optional content or an open world, time limits don't make any sense in an RPG.
The point of time limits is to establish a sense of urgency, but also to make the player pick and choose exploration and quest opportunities that go well with your character(s). It also discourages rest spamming. If you funnel the player down a linear path in your game and also add a time limit, you prevent the player from making those choices. All that can happen is making the player click faster, which isn't a test of skill in RPGs as they tend not to rely heavily on twitch skills.
-
Do promancers think your statistics should matter in romances? Should your charisma and conversational skills be checked, or should your vile little gnome get some romance shoved in his face just because, as per usual?
You can tell I'm bored.
-
2
-
-
Monks in contrast, if tanking, should be doing so because they are never actually getting hit, in D&D because of a mixture of high dexterity and their WIS armour bonus allowing them to anticipate incoming attacks enough to get out the way, which is fine given thats the standard route they go in any martial arts film, which the class is based off. But if they do get hit it should be serious. Whether P:E will have something equivical to that remains to be serious.
Really, the consequences of going unarmored should prohibit tanking IMO. Dodging gets v. hard as soon as you're facing multiple foes in a crowded area. The only situation I can imagine is monks "tanking" against magic users. That could be their domain.
I don't think rangers necessarily need a general backstory (although specific orders of them might) as such as its more a "role" like fighter and rogue than a specific "profession" like monks, paladins or clerics. Realistically there are several forms of ranger that fall within their remit: the classic originator one of resembling Aragorn is more or less a man or woman whose job it is to protect a certain area of wilderness. This could be that it's a stretch of wilderness borders on an enemy territory or one that is prone to monster infestations.Though there are two things to say about Tolkien's Dunedain rangers:
1) They have a very detailed backstory
2) it's still p. horrible
I know classes like the rogue don't have a general backstory either, but their concept is more self-explanatory
-
Right now it seems fighters are the best tanks, I really hope it will stay that way and not monks being great tanks due to "natural armor" or similar derp.
I think rangers need a good backstory, and I don't think I've ever read one (one that explains all their abilities and habits). They have been called elite soldiers, bounty hunters and hermits, but none of that is quite congruent with what they do.
-
My money is on Sawyer, but only after seeing his mace wielding skills
-
1
-
-
They do choose whether to be human or elven. That's what the choice between immortality and mortality is all about.
That's entirely about semantics.
As far as PE is concerned the conspicuous absence of any mention of interbreeding means to me that it's not a huge deal in this world anyway.
-
I voted for Major Gore, whoever that is.
-
2
-
-
Are humans boring in a fantasy setting? On the contrary, in my opinion they're particularly interesting; how would the human society evolve in a world full of magic? How would they treat other races/be treated by other races? How would the roles within the society change? etc.
In fact, that topic alone is quite often the sole theme of sci-fi works.
Usually this can only be "interesting" by giving humans the center stage, for which no convincing reason is given (humans are great diplomats! Noone can dislike the pink little buggers! All other species are too self-centered!)
-
Or the offspring of a human and an elf isn't a hybrid, but a full-fledged human or elf. Like in the Lord of the Rings mythos
uh WUT ?
Apart from being forced to choose between immortality and a finite life span, Tolkien was (intentionally) vague about the nature of half-elves. At any rate they could not choose to be more or less elf- or human-like. But he does designate them specifically as half-elven, while there is no mention of i.e. dwarf-hobbit offspring.
Apart from that, I don't think that's how it worked between Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens
-
The P:E wiki tells me the developers have stated there is no significant cultural divide between elves and humans living in the Aedyr Empire. I hadn't noticed that before.
Am I wrong to interpret that as, effectively, 'elves are like humans with pointy ears that live for centuries'? Unfortunate, if true.
I'd read over that w/o taking note before. I actually interpreted it as saying "human and elves both consider themselves Aedyr first and foremost". That would leave some room for some differences in housing, clothing, professions and religion.
Since half-elves aren't mentioned anywhere they obviously can't interbreed, so there should be some outward signs of difference between them.
-
Reddit is not the main forum where PE team member engage with the fan base. Our official forums here are.
N'aww. We just want to feel speshul. <3
-
ohai EPIC WIZARD BATTLES.
-
1
-
-
Btw, you could just as well accuse people in law enforcement of having no understanding of "grey areas".
-
I like that they are doing something new and getting rid of the religious/ goody two shoes overarching themes. This was dead weight anyway and made the class unnecessarily narrow. If you still want your paladin to support a specific faith, maybe there will be quests to that effect. If the main character has any influence on the stronghold you get, a paladin's stronghold could be a very efficiently run fortress. I'd like that.
-
-
My first character will probably be a Chanter.
That's because on my first playthrough I'll probably try to do as many different things as I can, and the Chanter will probably fit that role perfectly. I also love to collect lots of buffs, so the rest of my party will probably consist of a Paladin, Barbarian, Priest, Wizard and Cipher. I'll have to see if the Chanter can fill the role of the thief all by himself though.
-
Might as well have furry elves with barbed penises then.
-
Elves MUST ALWAYS be well-adapted at what they're doing. It doesn't matter what niche they're filling in the world's ecosystem, just that they're more than moderately succesful. Their entire charm and elitism depend on it.
Usually, they're the best archers or bowyers.
Often, they're most adept at wielding magic.
Equally as often, they're the most in tune with nature.
In Dark Sun (where they tried to break the mould), they were the best runners.
Dwarves we have come to love as stubborn little mother****ers who can toil endlessly, Sisyphus style, and become all the more loveable for it. Also "fallen" dwarves who have forgotten all crafts and now only bake mud cakes are common. With elves, that is pretty rare.
-
In a game like Wiz 8 or a high level DnD game death is trivial enough not to warrant a reload, it's very gratifying to take that in stride and try to resurrect your fallen. I like that. A game's mechanics shouldn't be built around the assumption that people will just reload if they don't like the C's to their C's.
No on the dead companion quest, plz. First of all I don't think it's a great adventure hook, secondly it's content you miss out on if you manage to keep everyone alive which is sort of counter productive, and thirdly it's not available if you have NPC's from the Adventurer's Hall.
-
like the body of a certain dead cat, you should get some reactions if you carry your dead companions around
-
If the Auamaua have a primitive, warlike tribal culture, they must also have some powerful magic or else they'd probably get steamrolled by the more advanced civilizations. Now Auamaua mages aren't what I had in mind when I first read about them... but could be interesting.
-
Given what they've said so far, I'm inclined to believe that there is no such thing as a "non-caster" in P:E (unless you have no soul). The only problem is wrapping our brains around how Fighters and Rogues are going to draw on their soul. If I'd have to guess, I'd say fighters will get to pick abilities like Whirlwind, while Rogues would probably get more shadow-themed abilities.
Yes, I think there will be. It mostly comes down to definition though. All classes will have "special abilities", which would translate to class abilities in DnD but probably also spell-like abilities in some cases (not a DnD nerd). Not all classes will outright cast "spells". My point was that for those classes that have spells, I'd rather they had no "special abilities" on top of that (which is all classes like the Fighter and Barbarian would probably get).
I suspect that using special abilities will not eat up points in any way (stamina has been said to not be tied to other activities) but rather be on a limited-uses-per-day basis, so calling them non-casters should be legit.
-
1
-
-
Furries or not, too many tool-making cultures **** a setting up. If there are too many of them around you ask yourself what the point of being a human is anyway, at least the other races have blue skin and ****. Next to the "core three", Orlans, Auamaua and especially Godlike feel a bit tacked-on, I just don't mind because I like to have variety when character building. Just don't overdo it and add too many sentient species that don't come naturally with the way your world is set up and consequently always feel artificial.
-
1
-
Randomization and Replayability
in Pillars of Eternity: Stories (Spoiler Warning!)
Posted
I hope a certain element of randomization will be in there as far as encounters go. Not so much dungeon maps, I agree that this team can do better if they hand-craft the environments. What I don't want is knowing exactly what enemies await me (without scouting), so I can make a plan beforehand exactly how to take them all out. Say I know there's a group of casters with their guards waiting for me. I have an idea what their spell assortment looks like and what their preferred spells are. I know the strengths and weaknesses of their guards. Now if some of their ogre guards are replaced with archers that go after my wizards, and I couldn't factor that in beforehand, that makes the encounter not only more challenging but also more fun for me and increases immersion.