Sacred_Path

You may not realize it, but you're arguing for more arbitrarity in the game, which seems very odd at best. Anyways, this argument is pretty weak, as the inclusion of killable children is one aspect of verisimilitude that is very easy to achieve. Other things, like a believable economy and its related aspects like architecture are much harder to simulate realistically.

You're ignoring the point where I said that you can kill NPC's. So what exactly is the reasoning why you can't kill children? Do you really see a logical leap required here?

Because it might give XP? @curry If you were the mayor of a humble town, would you live in a feudal villa? There's no argument about what contributes to someone's immersion and what doesn't other than your subjective preferences. But an argument can be made for children being in the game simply because children are an explanation for the NPC's that are already there. Or do you want to argue against the presence of NPC's in RPG's?

Probably immersion purposes. You know, the same reason why you want towns that actually have buildings rather than a few NPC's standing out in the open.

It's about consistency. If I can kill monsters, I should probably be able to kill NPC's. If I can kill NPC's, I should be able to kill children. Just like if I can destroy dungeon walls, I probably should be able to destroy town walls.

MCA doesn't age. He just procrastinates.

I disagree because that's simply not the type of game we're looking at. In Tides of Numenera? Totally. I expect an introspective journey, no slaying of dragons, or whatever Numenera has.

K. Let it be said that an ending that only resolves the premise (that you're personally affected by some extraordinary event) but has no ramifications for the rest of the world I don't consider satisfactory.

5 bucks says P:E will have an unsatisfactory, ambiguous ending, as they want the setting to be expendable but probably don't want it to end on a cliffhanger.

Everyone put heavy armor on a cleric in AD&D, yes. Won't be that way in P:E though.

Preferrably nothing that touches the mechanics, unless something is obviously bugged, like a spell that invariably does 10000 points of damage to anything (I'm looking at you Arcanum).

I don't wear rings, earrings or necklaces IRL either. But that's probably because they aren't magical.

Loss of health will result in you being maimed, which will bestow penalties as you described. On the higher difficulties you will be dead, which is, well, a permanent injury in its own right.

I vote for magical hula hoops.

Should Obsidian become that company that turns every TV series into an RPG? Discuss.

You accidentally what?

Something like this. I also like castles

Typical arrogant Elven garbage from Aloth there.

No worries, you're right up there with pictures of a Tim Cain chocolate cake.

Sounds like there's more of a focus on strategically building your party and deploying it sensibly than building individual characters and utilizing them well tactically. Which is ok for a 6 person party game and certainly oldschool like IE games.

will there be cake?

No, I got that. But apart from names, many class based systems allow for quite a lot of breadth in that direction. Pickpocketing or whatever it's called now (in D&D) is a skill that you can choose to invest in or not. 'Backstabbing' indeed conjures quite a specific image of a character, but an attack that hits especially hard if your opponent is immobilized like 'sneak attack' goes with a lot of different characters and certainly a swashbuckler IMO. A worse example may be the Bard, as he's always bound to be a musician, much like the Chanter in P:E. But overall, I find that even a system with things like alignment restrictions allows for quite a lot of roleplaying and customization.

Or if you simply want to know that your order has been received and registered. As has been said already, there are also us PayPal backers.

Wow, I think I should actually hang out on SA instead of here.

The problem might be your looking for someone to exactly fit the template of "cool adventurer dude" which seems really broad I dislike most classless systems because they often only work that way for player characters. NPC's, especially hostiles, still tend to be designed according to archetypes. You rarely stumble upon a party of rogues where the one with silken robes and a lute on his back is actually a brutal offensive fighter and the guy in the heaviest armor is actually a very competent wizard. Even in a class system that's designed around multiclassing like D&D 3E NPC's rarely had a wild assortment of classes, in contrast to the players gaming the hell out of the system.