forgottenlor

I'd like to try a non-"core 4" party. I.e. no wizard, cleric, fighter, or rogue. I'm not sure how practical this will be though.

Yeah it needs a shot in the arm. On the other hand this week is has steadily gained about 1% funding per day, and hasn't stagnated (yet) like Greywalkers or some other projects I have funded. I'm hoping this weekend does it well. Normally Friday and Saturday are good days for funding. It needs to be around 50% by the last weeked if it is to have any chance, I think.

I got my key too. Thanks, Infinitron.

Many succesful kickstarters I have seen have made between 1/3 and 1/2 of their funding in the last week, especially if its a question of getting funded or not. I fear "After Reset "is setting itself up to fail. I highly doubt that they can make 900,000$. The Mandate is struggling to get half of that much, and they have been covered and recommended by a number of media sources. I mean, that's about as much as Brian Fargo has been asking for to make sequels of beloved computer games. There are also a lot of good looking RPGs being kickstarted now. I know I've given enough in the last few months. Maybe I'll consider donating if The Mandate, Greywalkers, and Deathfire fail and After Reset is looking like it may have a chance to get funded.

For those old folks like me who like really old school games there is Lords of Xulima: https://d2pq0u4uni88oo.cloudfront.net/projects/687831/video-306387-h264_high.mp4 I'm actually not worried about The Mandate getting funded. I think Jagged Alliance was still under 40% when it was at the same point in its campaign as the Mandate is. Rather the question is if the Mandate can be made as planned if it just barely reaches funding. Maybe since they've been greenlighted they'll go the early access route.

I expect mechanically the wizard will be more like a D&D Sorcerer, than a D&D wizard. There were a lot of spells in D&D that were fun in a pen & paper game, but very hard to implement well in a computer game. Still, game designers tried to implement in some form or another, and many of them were subpar. I expect to see fewer, but better balanced spells in P:E.

Ok, I sent them a message, I will post what they say when they get back to me.

A save game system has to be so good that it doesn't force you to replay large portions of the game, simpy because you fail. This is I think many peoples problem with Shadowrun Returns is. If the game makes you live with a choice, that doesn't relate to replaying large chunks of the game, but forks out the narrative, then I think its ok if you don't get to save, that leads to replayability. Free saving isn't perfect, but very few games without free saving do a good job of making fix save points add to the atmosphere of the game rather than be an annoyance.

I also backed Torment (with a copy of W2) and didn't get a Wasteland 1 key.

hmm, w It's possible that your memory may be playing tricks on you, or else you played a different version of BGI to me, but in the BG I played all companions levelled in the background with your party. Generally this made no difference, except to make the thieves Safana, Coran and particularly Alora practically useless because by the time you reached them most of their thieving points had already been mispent by the AI. Well its been a long time since my first playthrough of Baldur's Gate. . .Maybe my memory is failing.

I actually understood this, as it allowed you to choose any companions for your party without worrying about when you picked them up. In the first Baldur's gate I passed on the Paladin in my first playthrough, because I ran into him very late in the game, and my party was already much higher level. I thought "Gosh, if only I had found him sooner. . ." This can be interesting in that allows for a raidcally different party in a 2nd playthrough. In NWN2, though I took which characters I liked the best based on their personalities and what classes they had, not due to their level.

I'm worried they're asking for too much money for this type of game, and I say that though I love games likes Might and Magic and Wizardry. I'm not sure what type of audience there is. The last one that was commercially succesful was Might and Magic 7, and that was in 1998, I think. That sort of limits the audience.

I also don't like different class tables. However, I would be for an xp penalty for characters buying some sort of advantage. However, this leads to balancing issues and I'm not sure how easy it would be to implement. Example: Your character has amazing hand to eye coordination and gets a bonus to mechanics and "Dexterity" or whatever stat is similar but must pay a 5% xp penalty.

Guido Henkl, who produced Planescape:Torment, and who is immortalized on the box (he is the model of the nameless one covered in blue makeup) is trying his own kickstarter. Looks sort of like Wizardry or Might and Magic: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/g3studios/deathfire-ruins-of-nethermore?ref=category Thoughts?

You omitted the part where Sawyer also said that only Fighters can "engage" more than one person at a time. Tanking as a concept isn't about taking hits, it is about controlling the enemy by forcing them to fight who you want and be positioned where you want them. Paladins can only do that with one person, just like every other melee. Only the Fighter can control more than one enemy at a time by this method, hence why it is "the tank". In his example his paladin could have stopped that one guy, but if it had been two who rushed the mage... well he would need more than the paladin. No class will be "must have". But if you plan to control combat through the tanking method there is only going to be one "great" choice. Also be aware the paladins skills are very positioning dependent, sometimes using it to intercept someone will also force your paladin into a sub optimal location for the fight and they wont be able to use their best abilities as well as they could have. Every class will have it's strength in weakness, I suspect they won't be nearly as flexible as was suggested in the past. I also suspect that if you build a party that doesn't cover each others weaknesses and don't play your characters to their strengths and instead try to "go outside the mold" you are going to have a very rough game. One could get around controlling multiple opponents in I.E games with positioning. I do realize that the fighters have a great advantange though, and I fear that you are right that each class with have its strengths, and some may have roles that no other class can fill. For me the role of the Fighter at controlling combat, and the Wizard as a ranged crowd controller are so great, that they seam like "must haves" for me in an effective party, which is why I am hoping that parties can function without them, which is why I'd like to see a test party without either class. If the fighter is so effective as a party protector, than sort of worries me about the roles of the rogue, barbarian, and monk.

Yeah it looks like priests can wear decent armour, at the very least. In the old D&D games clerics could handle the melee role pretty well, since with special abilities and good armour they could hold their own on the front rank and even dish out some damage. However, it sounds like this won't necessarily be the standard role for a P:E priest, since they are supposed to be primarily spell casters. Perhaps they lack melee abilities or the ability to absorb damage, or perhaps they can take some hits but can't dish out damage with weapons reliably.

I also don't believe the monk will be "as good as" a tank as a fighter. I'd like to see a party without a fighter that isn't hamstrung, though, and I'd like to see who takes point when no fighter is present. I can't imagine that being the rogue (though perhaps I'm wrong), so I'd like to see if another character can be build to do that. The only possiblities I see are: Paladin, Monk, & Barbarian.

Yeah, I suppose the monk could sub in as well. I never thought of him as a better tank than a Barbarian or Paladin, but if he could fill the role of front rank damage absorber better, than why not?

Sorry to play the pessimist, but no update. I think the last update was made, because they knew the big update would still take awhile. I'd expect next week or the week after.

I personally think a playtest will be a LONG way off, but I'd like to see how the non wizard spellcasters work. I also chose the paladin and barbarian, because I want to see who can tank if no fighter is in the party. That's it, I want to see what can be done in this game WITHOUT a fighter or a wizard, since for me those two sound closest to autoincludes.

In this update it says the big update is coming soon, and part of it will be the backer site. Then it also says, about the site: "On the right there is our “Game” section of the site, where over the coming months more information and art about the various races, classes, characters, critters, and locations of interest in the game can be found." I'm gonna guess when they put the site up there will already be lots of information on it that we haven't seen before about the characters and abilities etc, then more will be added later on They need to pace themselves. Saw a speculative release date of April 2014 in the October issue of the German magazine Gamestar, and I am betting it will take them even longer to finish, so they won't want to have nothing to say later on.

Going down to 4 classes and losing alot of additional content and the megadungeon? That just goes to show that people have different opinions. I'm much happier with the extra classes and game content.

I think you're confused. This isn't Hunting Simulator or Sim Earth.

I'm guessing that the Baldur's gate/Neverwinter Nights style of travel is much easier to implement than the Fallout/or Storm of Zehir type travel. Basically you have a small number of things to click and you're off to the next area. Whereas exploring a map requires alot more work to implement. While I also really liked the Fallout/SOZ type world map, I'd be satisfied with the Baldur's Gate type map if that means other areas of the game are more detailed.

I also never picked an Icewind Dale voice because of the class its supposedly associated with. Some classes had a number of appealing voices, others did not. However, I did try to assign the voice that shouts about lthunder and lightning to some type of spell caster. I also think by linking a voice to a "personatliy type" you can have more interesting comments than when they are tied to a class or profession.