Jump to content

BetrayTheWorld

Members
  • Content Count

    126
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

75 Excellent

About BetrayTheWorld

  • Rank
    (3) Conjurer

Profile Information

  • Interests
    Games.
  1. I also think it's cool that people behind the making of the games are getting more exposure due to the kickstarter model. It paves the way for the pocket protector rock star of the future. lol
  2. The reason I say hidden is because of basically one thing. There are people who play games not to ... play them, but to "game the game" or go after achievements and treat the game they are playing as some sort of weird trophy item. Then there are also people who for whatever reason hate alignment, probably because they only ever see it done wrong. Ultimately the idea is about allowing the player to create the character they want, giving the game a way of reacting to that character in a "reasonable" way, making npc's slightly more "real", and just helping to immerse you in a game without forcing you to be "Shepard". Sometimes knowing these things are there though can get in the way of that and make you think I need to score XYZ instead of just making you focus on being the character you want. At least for some players. I understand, but I still think that hidden values would be less appealing overall than transparent values. So far as your idea for character creation asking a series of questions, there is a MUD called Accursed Lands that did this for their character creation, and it's actually really enjoyable to create a character there. There's normally about 8-10 questions that start out like: "When you're 5 years old, x happens and you're left with a decision, do you do A, B, C, or D?" The questions aren't the same each time you play either. There is a random element to it, and subsequent questions are reactive to the answers of earlier questions. In general, it's a really immersive character design method that helps people flesh out where their character came from, and what sorts of things happened to them to shape who they become. Using this sort of thing in character creation doesn't need to be limited to only effecting starting morality or reputation either. It could actually equate into bonuses or penalties in skills and attributes as well, which I think would only add to it's value and enjoyability. I encourage you to connect to Accursed lands and create a character there to see what I mean, if you can stomach a text-based RPG long enough to make a character or two.
  3. Well thought out, overall good post. I like and agree with all of your ideas, except the part about making all the stats hidden. I don't see a need for that.
  4. No. If you don't like reloading when something goes wrong, then don't. Others don't have time to play through a game more than once or twice. Some people would prefer to have the experience they're looking for the first time through. I don't think there is any logical reason to stop them from being able to do that. If this was an "optional only" setting that you could select at the beginning of the game to keep yourself from yielding to temptation, I would support it. However, barring that, see the first word of my post.
  5. It does. You level up and get skill points to spend. That is representative of you gaining that experience. If you choose not to invest points in lockpicking, then it is YOU who decide that your character didn't learn anything from the lockpicking he did leading up to that. This argument doesn't carry any weight against the lockpicking skill point investment at all, unless you're arguing for a system which completely takes away "skill points" in favor of a system that let's you get better at ALL skills by using them. And while I do like the idea of a system that let's you get better at skills you use, these systems are far from perfect, and open to lots of exploitation(Oblivion, sneak walk against a wall while you go see a movie, anyone?).
  6. And who in their right mind would -believe- you when you said, "I have this map worth ten thousand gold..." Certainly sounds like a scam to me.
  7. Now would be a perfect time to lock this thread.
  8. The thing is, what "class" is an assassin then? Ultimately, this argument doesn't hold weight when compared to the rest of your post. If rogues have sneak attack, which you say they should, then along with their other skills, they are the class most ideally suited to be an assassin. I'm not saying EVERY rogue needs to be built this way. Rather, I'm saying that giving people the choices on how they want to play/make their character should be a major priority. Let's take a look at what an assassin needs skill-wise, versus what a thief needs. Assassin Required Skillset: A method of attack that can dispatch an unsuspecting target quickly, so that they can escape.(ie, poisons and sneak attack) Sneak/Hide so they can reach their target unaware. Disarm Traps/Pick Locks, as above. For the same reasons, the following skills, if they exist: search, disguise, spot, climbing, bluff, diplomacy, intimidate, etc. To assist in getting away if things go poorly, tumble. Typical rogue skillset: Rather than rehash all of the above, which are ALL standard rogue skills in D&D, suffice to say that pretty much every rogue skill is either directly useful for an assassin, or supports the skills that are. (Such as search supporting the disable trap skill - Can't disable what you don't see.) Again, this doesn't mean that every rogue would focus their efforts on being the best assassin they could be. My point is, it's a natural fit. So one rogue might focus less on the poisons/sneak attack aspects and more on the picking locks/slight of hand aspects. It's all in their objective. As an example, there is an assassin and a thief. One's target is the man sleeping in the bedroom, while the other's is the safe owned by the man sleeping in the bedroom. Both require the same skills to get to their target. It's not until they're already there, ready to do the deed that any differences become evident. In story form, the above two individuals would look and sound nearly identical all the way up to the point of being inside the bedroom with the man and the safe. I am the assassin, my objective is to get to a location undetected, and kill something. I am the thief, my objective is to get to a location undetected, and steal something. Note that only one word changes. EDIT: I'd also like to point out that I've never argued for rogues to have the same base attack bonus as fighters, so I'm certainly not of the point of view that rogues should be "do-it-all ninjas" that turn into a fighter when they get caught. As it has always been in D&D, a career fighter should always be better in a straight up fight. The increased base attack bonus, along with fighter-specific damage and attack feats accomplishes this. It seems like people arguing in this thread are ignoring just how huge an advantage the BAB progression is that fighters get.
  9. I'd like to just get off of this subject completely. I actually enjoyed the debates going on in this thread until it got hijacked by religion. Gods exist in the game. Religion exists. Atheism likely doesn't exist because people know that the Gods exist. If previous games are any indication, then there will likely be characters that don't worship any particular deity. There really isn't a debate to be had about it. Whatever they're going to do with it, they'll do with it, and it will likely be fine. Even if there ARE details to debate, this thread really isn't the place to do it. If you're really wanting to argue specifics of religious ideas in game, I'd suggest starting a new thread on that topic. This thread is about the general idea of mature themes in the game.
  10. and his competitors would raise their prices. At first, this idea sounds brilliant. While this is a realistic assumption based on real markets, assuming the pool of competitors is small enough, I don't think it should apply here on much of a noticeable scale. There are several reasons for this. First, in an RPG, there are several things that are to be considered abstractions. One of those things, as represented in a "big" city in a game, is it's merchants. Sure, mechanically, you may only have the option of purchasing weapons from 1-3 merchants in a town. However, this is simply a representation of the available merchandise. In a "real" big city, you'd have many such options, so driving 1 of them out of business would impact the overall marketplace minimally. It's not until you impact the majority that you'd see these kinds of changes occur. In smaller villages, however, this issue wouldn't necessarily apply. It's very feasible for a village to only have 1 blacksmith. Second, if such a system was implemented, it'd need to be forgiving enough not to discourage players from playing a particular style of play. You wouldn't want to make playing a thief less viable because using your thieving skills makes the rest of the game more difficult(ie higher prices). While there are probably ways to implement this sort of thing effectively, I'd prefer to see effort spent towards making thieving more realistic, so that "cleaning someone out" isn't really as viable of an option. I've noticed in several games, people stand by and watch you pick locks in their house, empty their drawers, and still speak to you as if everything is hunky dorey. I'd prefer that people in the game care about their belongings, and actively seek to protect them. As far as pickpocketing goes, I think a system that had increasing difficulty for subsequent attempts would work well. This would be accompanied by the ability to target specific items in your target's inventory for theft, and create a scenario where people would need to carefully choose the items they tried to steal, rather than just stealing everything they see. It's also more realistic. If you bump into someone on the subway, and lift their wallet, you can probably get away with it if you're good. But if you bump into someone 37 times, leaving them wearing a pair of socks and a smile, I don't think they're going to accept your "Scuse me, sir."
  11. Actually, it'd be less work than that if you grouped weapons together that were used in the same way. For instance, a handaxe and a machete are two different weapons that are functionally used in exactly the same way. Both are single-handed, chopping-only types of weapons. Therefore the abilities and animations associated with their use wouldn't have to be different. Further, single-handed weapons that had both chopping and thrusting capability could share -some- animations with those as well, narrowing the number of animations that need to be created. Basically, I don't think we need to oversimplify a good idea.
  12. I'm normally all for more options, but this one, I think I could do without. I may be incorrect here, but even in "Ironman" mode, if you die, I think you can restore to the beginning of your play session. I think all ironman mode does is disable you being able to save your game except when you quit. Which, really, if that's what it is, it should be renamed inconvenience mode, because all you have to do to override the system is quit the game, restart, and load from your previous save. If, on the other hand, their ironman mode is truly a "die and start over" situation, then that's cool, and it certainly adds a sense of mortality to your decision-making in the game. Even if the latter is the case, I don't think your idea is a bad one, it's just not appealing to me.
  13. Freaking Gizmo?!?! lol, I'd love to see this race in a game. Maybe they have an inherent racial ability to turn into gremlins once a day.
×
×
  • Create New...