Jump to content
The Community Blog (An Invitation)

forgottenlor

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    288

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by forgottenlor

  1. forgottenlor
    What I mean is specifically when they clash with the main character. A bad NPC is Edwin. If you're a wizard, he is you but better. While he would fit with a fighter Bhallspawn, he makes a Bhallspawn wizard redundant. An optimal party would ditch a PC wizard and put Edwin in that slot. A bad NPC is that halfling fighter you find right outside Candlekeep. If you're a mage, he can be a meatshield to protect you from the Candlekeep wolf. However, if you're a fighter, he's you but worse. He takes up a party slot that could instead be used on someone useful, like Edwin. A good NPC is Dakkon. If you're a wizard, than he can be a fighter who occasionally buffs himself to absurd heights in order to take out important targets. If you're a fighter, he can be the magical artillery, but can still pull out a sword and start slashing if the need arises. He can be used no matter what the PC is, and will never compete with the PC. A good NPC is Fall from Grace. She does something you can't do. She doesn't make any pc redundant, as she is unique. While I have nothing against NPCs having their own unique quirks, I cannot agree that in a 6 character party that some redundancy is bad. I played Baldurs Gate and Baldur's Gate II with 2 wizards and did not regret it at all. Even in the case that the NPC or PC is slightlymore powerful, one can learn different spells, skills, or powers, or use different equipment (Fighters specializing in different weapons, for example). Also Edwin was a specialist Conjurerer, which shut him out of using certain spells, and there were some quite useful ones, which my PC used.
  2. forgottenlor
    The biggest problem, I think is the weight issue.
  3. forgottenlor
    This system would work quite well in a turn-based game, but seeing as how PoE is RTwP the system might not be as applicable. I actually think it would. You would have to fill your quiver. This could be an action button that begins filling your quiver. If uninterrupted your archer fills his/her quiver till its full. You could pause at any time though to take a new action using however many arrows are in your quiver.
  4. forgottenlor
    My favourite solution from a gameplay solution (though not a logical one) is from a game I just started a few weeks ago, the roguelike Tales of the Maj'eyal. Basically you have a quiver. A quiver has 5-12 arrows (or bolts or whatnot) and you can fire all those off, but afterword you need to take one action to fill your quiver with one arrow. So if the quiver has 12 arrows you can fully reload it using 12 rounds. Archers (or those specializing with ranged attacks) can reload the quiver quicker. Both the quiver and bow can be enchanted. This of course means there are no super powered one shot arrows, but I find the system enjoyable.
  5. forgottenlor
    Other than ME2, I can think of some occasions. In KOTOR2 the Handmaiden died when I played a dark side playthrough. In DA:O I was betrayed by the assassin. Also in Planescape:Torment you must fight one of your companions. In the original Neverwinter Nights 2, you either have to fight BIshop, or everyone else.
  6. forgottenlor
    I'm really not sure how this is heresy. I thought it was more or less common knowledge.
  7. forgottenlor
    I confess, this may be the first time I've seen "good graphics" and "Morrowind" used in the same sentence... At the time it was released it was considered to have very good graphics, and indeed for it's time it did. I found it unplayably ugly. it was about a year later when I finally played having installed a bunch of mods to beautify it. But maybe I was alone in that opinion at the time... I remember when I first installed it being blown away by the giant mushrooms and the beautiful forests. On the other hand the people (and elves and so on) weren't particularly good for the time. Still the scenery was, in my memory incredible. I actually think Betheda makes beautiful scenery.
  8. forgottenlor
    As per usual, there is the intro guide to VtM:B (I liked how you wrote it): You shouldn't play Malkavian on your first playthrough, is a very different experience that may confuse if you don't know the story. It also takes some previous knowledge of the story to fully appreciate(translate) the Malkavian dialogue. If you're planning to do more than one playthrough, two suggestions: Try out the Clan Quest mod and put some space between your playthroughs. I don't know why but whenever I restart the game after I completed it I'm still on the mindframe of my previous character which somehow ruins my current one. After I wait for a bit I can get into the game without trouble. PS: I'm kind of jealous that you get to experience the Haunted house for the first time. You definately want to have this game patched. I think the community has made 9 or so. Also Vampire is one of those few games where its better not to overly specialize. I had a much more difficult playthrough the first time with my Gangrel close combat/ Thief character than I did in my playthroughs with a Toreodor and Ventrue all-arounder.
  9. forgottenlor
    Have you played Freedom Force? I know its more of SRPG, but I loved both parts. There was also a Superhero MMORPG, but I no longer play MMOs so I can't say if its any good. I definately agree its an underused genre.
  10. forgottenlor
    - I did not like Mask of the Betrayer and I hated seeing my infleunce on my companions in numbers. I also hate the soul drinking mechanic. I hated having only 4 (5) companions to choose from. - I liked Oblivion better than Morrowind, despite the stupid autoleveling system. - I love first person party based, turn based, RPGs like Might and Magic and Wizardry better than anything the modern world has made. I even buy crappy games with this kind of system, simpy because I have so much fun with it. - Knights of the Old Republic remains my high point of CRPGs. (I cry for you Bioware Where have the good times gone?) - While in general I hate button mashing, Vampire: Bloodlines, has some of my favourite characters and quests of any RPG. - While I loved the story of Planescape:Torment the middle of the game was too much an adventure game for me, and too little an RPG.
  11. forgottenlor
    I'm gonna say it again... The monetary point. If these things are stretch goals, then don't they only happen if we as a community pledge enough money? As I understand it money would not be the main issue, because if there is not enough, then those goals won't come to fruition anyways. I think its more a matter of time and being able to assign qualified and experienced developers to complete the stretch goals.
  12. forgottenlor
    While I agree all things being equal, new wilderness areas would be cool, I'd actually like to point out none of the other IE games had wilderness areas like the original Baldur's Gate. Both Icewind Dales were pretty much limited to dungeon exploration, with outdoor areas much more akin to dungeons than to Baldur's Gate wilderness. Baldur's Gate II and Planescape both had a huge explorable city. I definately agree that the wilderness areas were the high point of the original Baldur's Gate. It does sound like Pillars of Eternity will have some great cities to explore. Also the Wilderness areas we have seen seem to be large from the prototypes. For this reason I hope the game offers rewarding exploration both in cities and outside. Those people who were against the stretch goals feared a significantly later release date and that quantity would come before quality (that new outside areas might not necessarily entail joy of exploration.) Since the vast majority supported the stretch goals, I wonder if the points brought up by the minority might have been valid enough to prevent Obsidian from pursuing them.
  13. forgottenlor
    Even with abilities, it may be hard to make ones universally good for each class. At least with the Pillars of Eternity attribute system, no attribute is utterly worthless for any class, as opposed to Dungeons and Dragons. In almost all pen and paper and CRPGs I've played, specific races have tended to fit in better mechanically with some classes or skill sets. The few exceptions I can think have been noteworthy in that race was mostly a cosmetic choice. For example One CRPG gave each race a certain resistance bonus against a damage type. While that is perfectly balanced and makes each race universally useful, it seems to, in a mechanical sense, make the choice of race extremely trivial. I like the idea of racial abilities as being talents which are added to the pool of what can be chosen when leveling up. That would give more options for character customization and give the player the choice of just how much the racial mechanics come into play. It also prevents JFSOCC's Orc Wizard example, because I could avoid Orc racial traits and just take Wizard ones, if the Orc one don't make the Wizard better.
  14. forgottenlor
    I'm definately making my main pc a Godlike now. Racists beware. . . .
  15. forgottenlor
    I could absolutely care less about this announcement, and I think that goes for many others. The "romances" of Planescape:Torment, where there was absolutely no sex, and which really only were confirmed at the end of the game, were some of the best I've seen in a game. The female characters revealed their true feelings when they were facing death and then saying farewell to the Nameless one. The ones in Dragon Age and Neverwinter Nights 2 seemed completely forced in comparison. So I'd say that I'd appreciate a well written romance, but if the authors can't think one up, then its better to not have them at all.
  16. forgottenlor
    I'd prefer nature's poster boy, followed by the chanter.
  17. forgottenlor
    I also only have played Expeditions:Conquistidors. That game barely made funding and is just awesome. It seems to me they knew what they're doing and used there money wisely. I am actually rather optimistic about Kickstarters. Most of what has been made so far has been considered decent-good by the press. I think its very hard to match player expectations, though, especially for nostalgic games. When I see all the issues for this game and Might and Magic X (which I bought as Early Access) that players get worked over about, and which I consider relatively petty, I wonder if they aren't missing the point about what makes games fun.
  18. forgottenlor
    I'm really fond of the current attribute system, especially in comparison with the D&D system. For those who still have criticisms of the system, my questions would be the following. Do all stats have to be equally important, when all are potentially useful for any character? That is to say we have had example of a wizard with no resolve or a character with no perception (i.e. as dump stats). Some stats in the D&D CRPGS (I.e. Intellegence and Charisma) were an utter waste on some characters, but I don't believe resolve or perception will be this way. They can be useful if you build a character around them (or even if they are just average), so is it terrible to be able to build a decent character without them? Do we want every character to have say 12 or 14 in every stat? Is that interesting? Or is it perhaps better to be able to have low or average levels in some stats for some characters so that they can work in certain ways? I'd rather have a party with one character with low resolve and maybe 2 with high perception than having all of my character with all 12s and 14s. But hey, if a player can't decide on which stat is best and puts them all at the same level, that will work too. Isn't that the goal? Not that all stats are equal for all strategies, but that none is worthless on any particular character.
  19. forgottenlor
    If they truly release the game in December, then its a very long time for them to provide updates. Either they'll be releasing lots of information,or spacing it out more, or be releasing frequent but insubstantial updates.
  20. forgottenlor
    I like playing a utility character, So I'm guessing I'll go with a chanter, cipher or druid (I'll know for sure once I'm sure of the mechanics, though right now I'm tending chanter). I'll look at the character portraits and which race synergizes with my class choice and go with that. I'm tending towards Godlike. I doubt highly that I'll play an elf.
  21. forgottenlor
    I will probably use a mix. I'd like to take maybe 3 Obsidian companions. I think it will make replaying the game more interesting to use totally different companions on a second walkthrough.
  22. forgottenlor
    1. No. Any number is fine a long as all are useful. 2-3. Not sure this really matters. It depends on how useful each attribute is. 5. I don't know how important this is. It is also fine as a purely class or equipment defined attribute. 6. It seems like an alternative to ecumberance, so I have nothing against it.
  23. forgottenlor
    ... I'm a sad, sad panda now. Many apologies. Pure sloppiness on my part. I beg forgiveness.
  24. forgottenlor
    I'm simply saying with more funded projects you can have more workers and a more secure workplace. I'm also saying paying salaries require a steady flow of funding, so it is very relevant that Obsidian has two projects and not one (which is by the way more of less finished). Therefore I'm rebutting your statement that salaries may be irrelevant because of Stick of Truth.
  25. forgottenlor
    I'm not sure I'd prefer one over the other, but I think both (though with fundamentally different explanations) are much, much better than intellect. I really like Antioxidant's explanation for ferocity. On the other had I can see how Soul or Spirit, being more abstract terms, might fit better into already designed non combat skill checks, than say ferocity would.
×
×
  • Create New...