Hoku

As many before me have stated: the most important realism lies not in action, but in reaktion. For characters to respond in accordance with their allience, alignment, background and current situation to every given action is enough to give the game a sense of realism. Also, to respond to certain previous comments, I do not think it relevant to be focused on realism relation to our world in ways such as "A human could never lift a sword five times his own size", but would direct attention more towards consistency; if X, then Y, and not Z. Consistency, complemented with reasonable explanation is often what matters most. On a very personal note I particularly enjoy consistency in magic; If a person has a spell which allows him to put opponents to sleep he should be able to use that ability on his companions for them to be able to rest even where the game might deem it unsuitable. I'm sure you can think of a thousand such examples where magic could be used in a much more intelligent way. Perhaps the possibility to create/modify your own spells to a certain extent? Also, I believe in the power of communication; a character with high intelligence and charisma (and mayhap points spent on a "persuasion/rhetoric/communication-skill?) should be able to sway nearly anyone, nearly any way. As an RPG, the question is often whether the power should lie with the character or the player; should the player have to figure things out for himself even when his character has a high intelligence or should the game then point out which point of action that would most likely lead to which result? I feel that a good thing is to categorize actions after the attributes they follow; in a dialogue you might then have an option mayorly based on charisma, one based on intelligence, one based on chaos, while another on order, etc. which will require from the player the judgement to see which alternative the recipient is most likely to respond too, while the game gives him the possibility to weigh his judgement against his stats, as well as to play in accordance with a character not his own. Ex: Character has super-high intelligence and average charisma. He meets an NPC who is moderately receptive to flattery, but despises people whom are controlled by their intellects. Hence in an attempt to persuade this character, my judgement tells me that charisma is the best way to go, and the game allows me to see clearly which dialogue-option is controlled by charisma, and weigh it against for example my intelligence; "am I intelligent enough to outsmart him without him even realizing it?", and in that decision giving the final power back to the player. "Power to the Player" is what I personally prefer on account of me as a rule playing in accordance with myself; if the dialogue is well made I know which dialogue-option is controlled by what and it's plausible effect without being told, but for the sake of diversity and possibility to act in accordance with your characters actual stats when not playing in accordance with your "actual self"* I will speak for the above mentioned idea in spite of personal preferences. *Meaning playing as hyper-intelligent when one is not, as passive-aggressive despite that not actually being the case and so on, in a consistent manner. This of course to increase replay-value. It's darn late here, so if this post is blurry, poorly organized, lacking of visible red-thread and ill-formulated I beg pardon. "Just one last comment before bed!" You now how it is.

Generally as much as possible. ^^ I don't really see a function with independent sex, but for romance and friendship I think dialogues and quest-lines would be splendid. Prefferably with some effect on the actual game.* *See for example D.A.O. where good relations with your companions will make them help you more, as well as trust you further, giving you access to side-quests sprung from, but not related to the relationship.

As a general thing, connecting the characteristics and/or properties of something, such as an armor, to something else, such as a culture, a school of magic or a creature, does have the benefit of further defining the thing which is referred to, which can give both starting points from which to add lore, or ways to give the player a sense of the relevant lore without actually letting it take up "too much" space in the game, and so is in my opinion often the best way to go, based on constructive function and efficiency. Meaning that if a high-class chainmail is made out of "Valyrian Steel", one immediately imagines "Valyria" as a country of skilled blacksmiths, which means that they're a strong and straightforward people, not minding to get their hands dirty, who know how to appreciate skill and craftsmanship. If "Valyria" is a place to which you can never arrive, one will then have gotten a rather detailed image of the people and culture without you having to write a single line about it, while, if you *are* able to ge there, it gives you the opportunity to chock the player by, for example, completely crushing his image upon arrival. Etc.

I speak for no automatic points in leveling at all, but rather a limited selection in what you can spend points on, decided by what you actually use in gameplay. What would define the characters would be that they can set more points on something if they have practiced it, which makes sense realistically. I personally think it would be a good idea to have classes that are not given, but earned. Which also makes sense realistically. The possible exception to this would be if you chose to choose a background which placed you, at least partially in a class, at least in the eyes of others, in the way that coming from a long line of wizards and being gifted with magic would make you partially a wizard, no matter the extent to which you choose to ignore the magic you possess. Clearification: You start the game without class or skills (alternatively a class acquired from a chosen background, which would not limit you but, at least partially, define you in the eyes of other characters) then if you spend every breathing moment picking and grinding herbs until you level up you will be able to set say 10p on herbalism, and nothing else, while if you fight a little using magic, you speak to people, you create some things, you read some books and you practice a little swordsmanship, then you can set 2p on swordsmanship, communication, creation, combat-magic and lore. If you do all those things but you practice with your sword a little more than you fight with magic you can only set 1p on combat-magic but 3p on swordsmanship, etc. and if you favor swordsmanship before all else, having 30p on that and an even 5p on everything else, you would gain the class "Swordsman". If you continue with an even development on more than two traits you remain without class. (Class would then not affect anything save other characters' reaction to you in-game; doors opened and so on, but would in that have an impact, not so much on the character's development, but on the individual/group-storyline, which increases replay-value drastically) The most realistic thing would of course be to not have a level-system at all, but a fluent development of all characters, giving you immediate feedback on your efforts. A problem still remains with class-transitions; should you then always be a swordsman but merely a bad one if you stop focusing on the sword? Should you shift class if another value rises above the sword? If so, how many points above should be required? Should, and how would one, combine classes; can you be a "Bladed mage", and if so, how many points would be required of the two values, and between them and the other values? etc. The idea is far from perfected.