Mandragore

Totally OT, but I'm still amazed that they actually managed to insert an Apocalypse Now reference into what was basically a children's cartoon...

I get what you're saying, I think I was actually being a bit unclear. My point is that the magic in most western settings is more verbal than somatic. For instance in dying earth (the series that D&D "arcane" magic is based on) spells are essentially mathematical formulae that describe the universe; twisting them or changing them as you speak changes the thing you're describing. Another example would be the "words of power" that the Dovahkiin uses in Skyrim. By contrast eastern concepts of "magic" (like in Avatar) generally revolve around energy flowing through the body, directed outward by certain motions, often via martial arts. I like both, I just think the former fits the wizard archetype better. P.S. Material components (like a lantern for fire spells) seem like an interesting idea, but it would also be a hassle in terms of mechanics, especially if the items weren't reusable.

IIRC The magic in Avatar (and the accompanying choreography) is based off various styles of kung-fu. I don't really see why that would be appropriate for a game like this. Some finger waggling maybe, but please no "wizard dance"

You're conflating a sci-fi setting which is supposed to be the product of thousands of years of globalization with a fantasy setting where travel and cross-cultural exchange would be much more limited. I'm all for meeting a few exotic travelers over the course of the game (possibly the monk, as per my last post) but having a fully multi-cultural/ethnic society is pushing it considering the level of technology/advancement that Obsidian has described.

You could play an atheist though, someone who comes up with other explanations for disasters or natural phenomena. And since not even you as the player could distinguish i.e. a natural fire or lightning from a god-sent one, this shouldn't strain credulity. Also, you could try to spirit people away from cults, weakening their power base as well as their gods maybe. What I'm trying to say is that I'm only an atheist in real life because it makes sense to me. If I lived in say, the forgotten realms universe, I would be a believer because with physical evidence of magic and stuff lying around all over the place that's what would seem the most rational to me. All I want is the characters to have motivations that make sense. If there are real, active, interventionist gods, please don't have some herp de derp "skeptic" stereotype staggering around spouting off about the gods not being real all while surrounded by magic and other blatantly supernatural phenomena. If its more ambiguous then I could see having doubting or skeptic characters. Even if the gods definitely exist I could see having a character like Hyperion from the immortals who knows they exist but hates them for some reason, although unless (like Hyperion) he actually has some way to protect himself from them or hurt them, it would just be silly. When I DM I usually go for possibly non-existant or actively uncaring gods, because I feel like doing otherwise makes the players, particularly divine magic users feel too powerless. I hope PE takes the same route. It would be really cool if they did something similar to the Lovecraftian pantheon.

I presume you are trolling good sir. But to get this thread back on track, obviously religious issues don't go down with all players as smoothly as one could think (or as OE thought, even). Should religion then be a matter of serious discussion in the game? Are there many players who would like to question the entire concept of souls and their reincarnation ingame? This could be a really mature element (as long as it doesn't just result in some kewl gods-defying dialogue options) In fantasy games the gods are explicitly real, manifesting avatars, fueling divine magic etc. The main case for atheism IRL is that there is no such evidence. So what would the discussion be? I'm an atheist and I have no problem whatsoever with gods/magic etc in video games and PnPs, if I wasn't looking for escapism and fantasy, I wouldn't be playing them in the first place. The reincarnation thing sounds fine to me. The degree to which people are aware of it is something else however. Are people aware that they'll come back after death? Do they retain their memories? Is the concept treated as fact or superstition by the games inhabitants? etc. The answers to these questions are part of what separate low and high fantasy. Personally I hate settings where the inhabitants understand magic and the afterlife well enough to turn it into a science, IMO it removes all the fear and mystery from the world.

This is a fantasy setting with a 16th century level of technology, I don't see any reason why a monk party member couldn't be a traveler from some far off asiaesque continent. The whole monk archetype is supposed to be evocative of real world martial arts traditions, I think having him as an Asian foreigner furthers that idea as well as playing up the exotic nature of his abilities.

nop. Personally I find it funny (and a good thing) that RPGs are probably the last bastion in life where religion is simply accepted. Even people who want to play an atheist character don't usually argue against gods simply existing. Yeah, I kinda see your point there, but then again I have also noticed atheists "raging" in RPG to have to follow gods simply because they exist in the setting, one of the reasons why there is a semi-commie atheist empire in the setting of Pathfinder. Also, there were protests against the game SPORE because it had faith/religion depicted as an important evolutional step/era. (sigh) The most recent Civilization game (5 I guess) also avoided religion but later added it back in an expansion. Look here doofus. If you want to believe in magic IRL that's your choice. This is a fantasy game. The similarity (or dissimilarity) of themes in the game to your actual beliefs is neither a condemnation or endorsement of them. If you can't get that through your thick skull then at least just bow out with some dignity so the rest of us can get back to a relevant discussion P.S. @ Sacred Path: If the legitimacy of your entire belief system hinges on the fact that deities exist in fantasy video games you've got some serious problems...

Leaving aside the fact that he looks like a melancholic accountant's head stapled to Bruce Lee's body, what's with his skin? He looks like he's made of beef jerky.

That guy has to be trolling. He picked the one Japanese rpg that emulates practical western designs and the one western rpg that emulates anime. Not to mention he has a picture of Justin Beiber as his avatar... I kid, I kid.

When I saw the poll my first thought was of Crossroad Keep in NwN2, which is basically the sort of thing I'd be interested in in PE. A bit more autonomy would be nice though, maybe the ability to actually command the castle garrison to go out and perform vile acts of banditry on my behalf instead of just turning a blind eye while they do it anyway.

Which jrpgs have you played? My own few that I can think of that are, imo, really great: * Lufia 2 (SNES) * Grandia (PSX) * Final Fantasy 1-9 (PSX) * Disgaea (there exists an anime that does the story more justice than the game ever can do) (PS2) * Star Ocean (Super Nintendo, later re-mastered for PSP) * Soul Nomad and the World-Eaters (PS2) * The World Ends With You (DS) * Chrono Trigger (SNES) Heck isn't largely the SNES Era mostly JRPG's? Of your list I've played Disgaea and most of the Final Fantasy games; by in large those were on recommendations from friends, since, like I said, I don't really enjoy them. The Final Fantasy series in particular (impending weaboo firestorm) has some truly ridiculous villains. The only Jrpgs I've ever really liked are things that aren't really rpgs at all, like Dark Souls/Demon's Souls, Ico, Shadow of the colossus etc, all of which manage to be epic without being flashy or over-stylized, not to mention having excellent villains. They're also light on dialogue; broken engrish grammar is a huge verisimilitude killer for me. In case my first post wasn't clear, I don't like flashy bipolar metrosexuals as villains. I want an antagonist who looks and acts like he is capable of world conquest, rather than one who looks and acts like he could be the frontman for an 80s hair metal band. P.S. I'm not trying to bash on you or your preferences, but the moment PE starts looking like a Jrpg my interest and desire to buy it basically vanishes.

They see me trollin... I don't see why you had to post three pages of hyperbolic BS just to come out and say that all you were against was poor writing. Also I still can't see any reason why a food system in a game like this would be fun for anyone other than a complete sperglord with a hardon for performing mundane repetitive tasks ad infinitum. At this point I have to conclude that you're just being intentionally silly.

The same thing applies to healing. Seriously? One is a mechanic necessary for risk and recovery in combat, the other is completely extraneous.

Now you're just being facetious. Important yes, but to your health, not to the advancement of the plot or evolution of your character.

While I think the idea of a hunting minigame that you could engage in while your party is at camp sounds awesome, the second part of your post leaves me with a bizarre mental picture of you chasing down frolicking maidens while wearing a bright orange vest and carrying a shotgun.

I can't understand this arbitrarity. If you allow for the fact that your character has enough experience in his world to take care of his physical needs, why don't you just guess that he also knows how to satisfy his emotional needs? Thanks, but that means there's more reason to have food in the game than romance, u know? When you hit a monster with a sword, it dies. Not much variation in the outcome there either. Still it's in the game Absolutely. If I could romance a pie [and eat it], we'd all be happy and I'd buy 10 copies of this game. So slaughtering fantastic beasts with a sword is as mundane and commonplace a task as eating bread? What drugs are you on and how can I acquire them?

I'd like to assume that my character knows when they're hungry and how to plan to have food available to them when traveling. I don't like to assume my character knows how I want them to interact with other people. A character doesn't have to be in a romance to live; they do have to eat* to live. I'd like to assume dialog with other characters can lead to unexpected outcomes. If I eat bread, I should eat bread. Not roll for initiative and try to hit with my teeth. The only way these two situations - in my opinion - could be remotely relatable is if I have to have dialog options with my food to successfully eat or something. Which is just weird enough concept to be worth it. *or some eating equivalent if we're talking plant people or something Seconded. This isn't fallout or some other game were basic survival is one of the main challenges. Presumably your character is smart enough to buy rations at the inn before departing, not to mention that in most fantasy settings there are a surfeit of tasty non-irradiated animals frolicking about. I'm usually all for realism and verisimilitude, but in a game like PE i think this would just be obnoxious. Unless what we've seen and heard so far has been misleading and the setting is a post-apocalyptic wasteland, my answer to this is a resounding no.

"Horny old grognards" generally are getting it in the r/w dude. I completely agree, which is why I don't think they feel uncomfortable seeing it in a game. My post was less directed at this thread (although still somewhat) and more at the previous one were certain people were harping on about "platonic love" and the merits of celibacy.

There are others, but this is one of the reasons I avoid Jrpgs like the plague. The storytelling and characters are terrible. They usually try to make up for a villain's unitimidating appearance and lack of depth by giving them a surplus of flashy superpowers. Tywin Lannister is a scary MoFo regardless of what resources he has at his disposal. Sepiroth on the other hand, shorn of his powers, wouldn't be very intimidating to the game's human players, much less its protagonists. Given that this is (or seems to be so far) a low-fantasy, western style game in the classic tradition, lets look somewhere other than anime for inspiration.

After reading more of the posts in the previous thread and in this one. I'm starting to come to the conclusion that this is less a rational discussion about the merits of romance in RPGs and more an (admittedly hilarious) argument between horny old grognards like myself (who appreciate the occasional chainmail bikini) and anal retentive aspergers people who think that sex is icky.

No offense, but most of us don't want to see some whiny, brooding, porcelain skinned girlyman (or woman) as the villain. I'd like to see a competent villain, but he or she doesn't necessarily need to be charismatic; plenty of leaders gain the obedience of their underlings through fear or coercion.

People have already touched on a few things that I'd like to see in the game; racism (as opposed to some schmultzy forgotten realms love in), some social commentary injustice etc along with rape and other cringe inducers. One thing that hasn't really been mentioned so far though is violence. I'm not talking about gore or violence in combat, which I assume will be present regardless. What I would like to see are options for your protagonist to use violence as a problem solver ala mass effect. Assassination, execution, torture etc. Some situations where good PCs are confronted by ends vs means scenarios and have the chance to compromise their moral code or situations where evil PCs can just cut loose.

Saying that romance should be left out because its too big an expense for something that some people don't like is a bad argument. The same thing could be said about just about any aspect of a game. What about violence? Gore effects are expensive after all, and some people are squeamish. Its also operating under the assumption, not just that romance options are expensive, but that they are PROHIBITIVELY expensive and that other aspects of the game will suffer from their inclusion. There is absolutely nothing to base this on. There will always be aspects of any game that don't appeal to certain people. Either you like them, you like the rest of the game enough to ignore them or you hate them so much you don't buy the game. No game can please everyone.

The thing is, I can't think of a single role-playing game were the romance sub-plots were important to the over-all plot. What if a character is celibate? Maybe he believes that by denying the flesh and allowing himself to focus on the spiritual, his magic is more powerful. Or maybe, the said character believes in no sex before marriage - and even if you romance them, they'll be no love-making until you tie the knot (which for whatever reason can't happen. Or maybe, just like some people in real life (see: asexuality) they don't experience sexual attraction. Maybe, like various characters in Song of Ice and Fire, a character is a child protagonist. Personally, I'd love an RPG to have a child party member. There are countless ways a character can be deep, without needing to resort to sex. The examples you're bringing up are pretty out there. I think most of us aren't really interested playing an pre-pubescent asexual christian fundamentalist ascetic. I am aware that romantic sub-plots are usually irrelevant to the main story; what I'm saying is that I would rather have one or two well fleshed out relationships that tie into the main plot and its dialogue and events than a ton of poorly developed, peripheral interactions that are just thrown in to ensure that every preference is being catered to. I think gay/straight options would be fine, not to mention that at this point people probably expect it, but I don't think you need much more than that. I'm not trying to advocate turning the game into some weaboo dating sim, I just think that romance/sexuality should be present in some form. You say "resort to sex" as though romance and sexuality are something abnormal or out of the ordinary, to the contrary. Fantasy literature is rife with examples, whether they're as muted and tasteful as Aragorn and Arwen in LotR or as raunchy as, well, pretty much everything in A Song of Ice and Fire.